Current Affairs EU In or Out

[catcherintherye]

I don’t play poker or gamble in any form. However I would imagine that rather than being taken to the cleaners the small chip player can always just get up and walk away....

Thats a smart move I think (though as most poker players say, they are not gamblers, they're seeking to minimise the risk).

But yes, a small chip player would play very differently. In many ways it's a much easier spot to play. Infrequent, very aggressive play but crucially where you are not bluffing. You do have to start by recognising your position at the table though.

I imagine it's a similar rule in business. If you are negotiating a takeover as a smaller partner, there's leverage with the bigger company, so you have to think differently about things. You probably won't get as much as they do in the negotiation, but proportionately you can exert more from the negotiation.

Essentially, trying to play it out as if you're Churchill and it's imminent WW2 again wouldn't be the framework I'd give to the negotiations. I would also want to avoid the "all in" (a poker term) scenario of a no deal on the basis that it would harm Europe (which it would) when they know, and have made clear it would damage us more. If they are aware of that, you have sort of lost the leverage you had.

 

[peteblue]

Thats a smart move I think (though as most poker players say, they are not gamblers, they're seeking to minimise the risk).

But yes, a small chip player would play very differently. In many ways it's a much easier spot to play. Infrequent, very aggressive play but crucially where you are not bluffing. You do have to start by recognising your position at the table though.

I imagine it's a similar rule in business. If you are negotiating a takeover as a smaller partner, there's leverage with the bigger company, so you have to think differently about things. You probably won't get as much as they do in the negotiation, but proportionately you can exert more from the negotiation.

Essentially, trying to play it out as if you're Churchill and it's imminent WW2 again wouldn't be the framework I'd give to the negotiations. I would also want to avoid the "all in" (a poker term) scenario of a no deal on the basis that it would harm Europe (which it would) when they know, and have made clear it would damage us more. If they are aware of that, you have sort of lost the leverage you had.

I know it sounds a bit trite, but most sensible companies try for a win win. I agree that the largest company has greater power but if the other company is worth doing business with, screwing them to the wall is not sensible business. You want everyone to thrive. The problem the EU have is that the U.K. is smart enough and holds good positions in many areas, finance and banking etc. Freed from the dead weight of having to agree everything with another 27 countries, we will be able to move much faster, as per the Japan deal, and tailor deals to benefit just two countries and not two plus 27 differing requirements and demands. They know this only too well, hence their demands to a ‘level playing field’, or control over the U.K. in other words. Anyway, it will all become clearer over the next few weeks, but I just hope these political egos don’t screw it up for either the U.K. or the EU.....

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

 

[Bruce Wayne]

This is why people are interested in the Swiss debate, because it's a clear rejection of ghoulish ideas like this one

 

[peteblue]

This is why people are interested in the Swiss debate, because it's a clear rejection of ghoulish ideas like this one

And what exactly is the Swiss connection ?.....

 

[Bruce Wayne]

And what exactly is the Swiss connection ?.....

They're rejecting the notion that not only should people be treated differently because of their passport, but that those with the wrong passport should be treated like vermin. It's a shame our home secretary doesn't share that view.

 

[peteblue]

They're rejecting the notion that not only should people be treated differently because of their passport, but that those with the wrong passport should be treated like vermin. It's a shame our home secretary doesn't share that view.

Are you sure that’s what the people of Switzerland believed they were voting for....

Meanwhile, the people arriving on boats came from the EU, have you no words of condemnation for them for allowing these poor souls to live in makeshift camps before being escorted through treacherous waters to reach the U.K......

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Are you sure that’s what the people of Switzerland believed they were voting for....

Meanwhile, the people arriving on boats came from the EU, have you no words of condemnation for them for allowing these poor souls to live in makeshift camps before being escorted through treacherous waters to reach the U.K......

I think the situation in the camps in Greece et al is an utter disgrace, yes, and is a stain on humanity. Sadly the far right is not something that is confined to the UK, and the EU have bent too far to appease racists across the continent. I also think, however, that it's utterly absurd that we dump people in countries while giving them no agency over the decision at all. The EU have tried to do this by 'spreading' out refugees as though they're a stain you need to distribute evenly, but you're doing no different by mandating that they have to stay in certain countries based not on where they believe they will actually be able to make a life, but on where they first run ashore. It's utterly bonkers and quite inhumane. And please don't plead humanity regarding the channel crossing as though you care for these people, when its precisely the immigration policy you've voted for that makes these people have to put their lives in the hands of people traffickers to begin with.

 

[trueblue84]

They're rejecting the notion that not only should people be treated differently because of their passport, but that those with the wrong passport should be treated like vermin. It's a shame our home secretary doesn't share that view.

I dont get how someone who is a descendent of migrants, who will have gone through all the pain, abuse and discrimination can even contemplate the things she says. The very definition of selling your soul.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I dont get how someone who is a descendent of migrants, who will have gone through all the pain, abuse and discrimination can even contemplate the things she says. The very definition of selling your soul.

Especially as the regulations she's bringing in would have prevented her parents from coming to Britain. Of course, being a migrant is no guarantee of empathy. A Czech guy we know has lived here about 15 years, but has very 1970s language when referring to different races. People are people at the end of the day. Some will be sound, some will be whoppers.

 

[peteblue]

I think the situation in the camps in Greece et al is an utter disgrace, yes, and is a stain on humanity. Sadly the far right is not something that is confined to the UK, and the EU have bent too far to appease racists across the continent. I also think, however, that it's utterly absurd that we dump people in countries while giving them no agency over the decision at all. The EU have tried to do this by 'spreading' out refugees as though they're a stain you need to distribute evenly, but you're doing no different by mandating that they have to stay in certain countries based not on where they believe they will actually be able to make a life, but on where they first run ashore. It's utterly bonkers and quite inhumane. And please don't plead humanity regarding the channel crossing as though you care for these people, when its precisely the immigration policy you've voted for that makes these people have to put their lives in the hands of people traffickers to begin with.

I think you, like many, confuse racism with legality. The EU and U.K. have legal procedures in place to deal with those people who wish to make a life in the EU or U.K. , yet these things are not applied. Personally I care not from where anybody comes from, nor of what colour, but it should be legal. The EU’s own laws want people to be processed and made legal within the first country they arrive at. Once legal permission to stay has been given they can travel throughout the EU and while there apply, if they wish, legally, for permission to make a life in the U.K. which may or not be granted. France is behaving disgracefully in this regard as they should be either sending people back to the country of entry or they should be processing them. This is the real issue. I do care for these people and their lives, but France is not an oppressed state, nor is it at war with anybody. I have no problem with anyone from anywhere on this planet coming here, having previously stated that we should take in a hefty portion of the Hong Kong population who have a right to live here. Be generous, be welcoming, but do it legally.....

 

[Bruce Wayne]

I think you, like many, confuse racism with legality. The EU and U.K. have legal procedures in place to deal with those people who wish to make a life in the EU or U.K. , yet these things are not applied. Personally I care not from where anybody comes from, nor of what colour, but it should be legal. The EU’s own laws want people to be processed and made legal within the first country they arrive at. Once legal permission to stay has been given they can travel throughout the EU and while there apply, if they wish, legally, for permission to make a life in the U.K. which may or not be granted. France is behaving disgracefully in this regard as they should be either sending people back to the country of entry or they should be processing them. This is the real issue. I do care for these people and their lives, but France is not an oppressed state, nor is it at war with anybody. I have no problem with anyone from anywhere on this planet coming here, having previously stated that we should take in a hefty portion of the Hong Kong population who have a right to live here. Be generous, be welcoming, but do it legally.....

Come on Pete, you know full well that the government you back have made a longstanding play to victimise migrants and to make the legal approach more punitive. You're also well aware that the Swiss vote to which I refer was talking about the free movement of people, with no state getting involved in what is an inherently personal decision to move and settle somewhere. So you may say, as Johnson does, that you're a globalist with good intentions, yet your actual actions have made it harder for people who are not British to live and settle here, and for people who are British to do likewise throughout Europe.

With regards to your comment about France, once again you refuse to give the actual people involved any say in where they should live. Have you thought that they may not actually want to live in France? That maybe they have family or friends in the UK, or speak English as their second language rather than French? Maybe their qualifications are more recognised in Britain than in France? You choose to ignore all of that and just distribute people as though they're cattle. You've repeatedly ignored the fact that your home secretary was considering processing the applications of refugees after dumping the poor sods on an island thousands of miles away. That's the government you've been propping up for years.

 

[catcherintherye]

I think you, like many, confuse racism with legality. The EU and U.K. have legal procedures in place to deal with those people who wish to make a life in the EU or U.K. , yet these things are not applied. Personally I care not from where anybody comes from, nor of what colour, but it should be legal. The EU’s own laws want people to be processed and made legal within the first country they arrive at. Once legal permission to stay has been given they can travel throughout the EU and while there apply, if they wish, legally, for permission to make a life in the U.K. which may or not be granted. France is behaving disgracefully in this regard as they should be either sending people back to the country of entry or they should be processing them. This is the real issue. I do care for these people and their lives, but France is not an oppressed state, nor is it at war with anybody. I have no problem with anyone from anywhere on this planet coming here, having previously stated that we should take in a hefty portion of the Hong Kong population who have a right to live here. Be generous, be welcoming, but do it legally.....

Why don't we just volunteer to take the migrants the EU are not processing and give them asylum here? I am very critical of the EU on this subject, and it would be good to see us taking the moral high ground on the issue. In fairness, if they really want Brexit to be a lasting success (which Ihope it will be) such a measure will go a long way to ensure it will be. Lets not reduce our behaviour to the case standards of the EU, but strive for excellence.

 

[catcherintherye]

Come on Pete, you know full well that the government you back have made a longstanding play to victimise migrants and to make the legal approach more punitive. You're also well aware that the Swiss vote to which I refer was talking about the free movement of people, with no state getting involved in what is an inherently personal decision to move and settle somewhere. So you may say, as Johnson does, that you're a globalist with good intentions, yet your actual actions have made it harder for people who are not British to live and settle here, and for people who are British to do likewise throughout Europe.

With regards to your comment about France, once again you refuse to give the actual people involved any say in where they should live. Have you thought that they may not actually want to live in France? That maybe they have family or friends in the UK, or speak English as their second language rather than French? Maybe their qualifications are more recognised in Britain than in France? You choose to ignore all of that and just distribute people as though they're cattle. You've repeatedly ignored the fact that your home secretary was considering processing the applications of refugees after dumping the poor sods on an island thousands of miles away. That's the government you've been propping up for years.

Very few refugees actually want to come to England (it's a fraction of the number that go to say Germany). It's mainly because of language, or for the msot part immediate family are here. Brothers, sisters, children, wives, husbands etc. We should be sending the navy across to bring them over, and thus removing the point of contention with France. They can do as they please, but we should strive for something better. If people are willing to risk their lives to want to be in this country, thats a damn site better than a lot of people who live here and good enough for me.

 

[gonetomorrow]

I know it sounds a bit trite, but most sensible companies try for a win win. I agree that the largest company has greater power but if the other company is worth doing business with, screwing them to the wall is not sensible business. You want everyone to thrive. The problem the EU have is that the U.K. is smart enough and holds good positions in many areas, finance and banking etc. Freed from the dead weight of having to agree everything with another 27 countries, we will be able to move much faster, as per the Japan deal, and tailor deals to benefit just two countries and not two plus 27 differing requirements and demands. They know this only too well, hence their demands to a ‘level playing field’, or control over the U.K. in other words. Anyway, it will all become clearer over the next few weeks, but I just hope these political egos don’t screw it up for either the U.K. or the EU.....

Boris and pals screw it up?
No way!