Biggest Disaster In Sir Alan Sugar’s Lifetime

[Hymie]

....and probably yours too.

 

&t=154s

[Hymie]

NJ said //If you are going to make fatuous arguments you should at least get it right.//

 

My list of Brexit benefits (as posted below, for the benefit of Brexiteers) are not my ‘fatuous arguments’; each has been expounded by prominent Brexiteers (such as Boris Johnson & Jacob Reece-Mogg, etc) as fantastic UK benefits gained through leaving the EU – but it’s good of you to point out that these are fatuous arguments for Brexit.

 

-          The Crown Mark on pub glasses

-          Being able to buy champagne in pint bottles, rather than 750ml (1.3 pints)

-          Mobile phone companies able to make roaming charges
(when using your phone in mainland Europe)

-          Not having to insure ride-on lawnmowers (and other self-powered vehicles) used on private land

-          Signage within Dartford tunnel spaced at yardage distances (in round numbers)

-          The freedom to release as much raw sewage as we like into our rivers and coastal waters (and doing so), without fear of being prosecuted by the European Commission

-          Un-capped bonuses permitted to be paid to our bankers

-          Not having to declare millions of pounds you have in secret off-shore tax havens

-          Shellfish beds found in the Thames estuary

 

I’ve had to remove from the list killing our honey-bees with EU banned pesticides, (as we have followed the EU in banning this); I will add one of my own, and that is not having to fit USB-C charging ports to certain electronic devices.

 

I reckon each one of the above Brexit benefits (fatuous or not) is well worth the loss of £40 billion p.a. in tax revenue to the UK exchequer.

[Hymie]

Blue passports seems to have been omitted from the above Brexit benefits.

[newmodarmy]

You keep going on about blue passports and signs in yards. Newjudge has explained to you elsewhere that you are wrong. Again.

[naomi24]

untitled, your response at 19:29 Fri didn't answer my question.

[gulliver1]

Never did like Sir Alan...........but I do now.

[Clone]

Best thing ever for Germany and France though.

 

 

 

 

Deutsche Bank profits collapse as German economy reels

Country’s largest lender vows to slash jobs after suffering 92pc slump

 

BERLIN, Jan 30 (Reuters) - The German economy contracted more than expected in the final quarter of last year, reigniting recession fears as Europe's biggest economy

 

https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250130-french-economy-shrinks-as-political-crisis-eclipses-olympic-boost

[New Judge]

"I reckon each one of the above Brexit benefits..."

I wasn't responding to "each one of the above." I was responding specifically to the two I mentioned. 

What you don't seem to understand (and probably never will because I've explained it many times in the past) is that it is not the merits or pros and cons of individual policies which need to be debated. 

All of the items you mention (and many more besides) should be matters for national governments to decide. There is no reason why the EU should determine whether people need insurance to use a lawn mower. Some countries might prefer them to, others might not. Similarly with bankers' bonuses. Each of the 28 (now 27) countries forming the EU is different - some of them enormously so. Their economies are very disparate. In some of them (quite a few I suspect) the issue of bankers' bonuses may not ever arise because they are not paid. So why should those countries have a say in how much UK banks pay their employees?

That is the reason why the EU has outgrown its purpose. It has suffered "mission creep" on an enormous scale. It will not change because the more powers it assumes, the more it will crave. Other member nations will come to realise this to their cost - and good luck to them.

[Hymie]

My list of Brexit benefits is complete nonsense - because there are no Brexit benefits to the UK.

 

As stated, the list of Brexit benefits are those extolled by prominent Brexiteers (such as Boris Johnson, Jacob Reece-Mogg and others) – so you can’t blame me for the nonsense in the list of benefits.

[New Judge]

So you disagree that decisions on such matters should be for national governments? 

[Hymie]

No, I don’t – for many the advantage of having a common rule/law throughout Europe benefits the citizens of Europe.

 

Take USB-C charging ports on electronic equipment - I must have over 50 different direct plug-in electrical power supplies (collected over the years) – with a common standard, this number would be greatly reduced.

 

Allowing one country to unacceptably pollute the sea with raw sewage to the detriment of others, makes no sense at all.

 

Having common weights & measures allows for scale of supply, without leaving people wondering how much is in a can of 12 ounces.

 

The rule on insuring powered vehicles on private land was introduced to ensure compensation for those injured by such vehicles, who would otherwise have to try to sue the owner.  If you think such rule would be an unacceptable imposition on UK citizens – presumably you also think the requirement to insure power vehicles on public roads is equally out of order.

 

Excessive banker bonuses led to the banking crisis – which cost tax payers dearly.

With no limit on such bonuses, if I was an investment banker paid say 0.1% on any investment gains and identified a risky investment that had a potential return of 50% - I’d bet the bank on the investment.  If it came off, I’d a multi-millionaire, if not the bank would go bust (but what would I care, it’s not my money I’m gambling with).

The above is why there needs to be limits on banker bonuses – just wait until the tax payer has to bail out another UK bank.

 

Allowing people to hide their wealth in off-shore accounts (to avoid paying tax) – would appear a bad idea to me – but then I’m not a wealthy person trying to avoid paying my fair share of tax.

[newmodarmy]

That example on bankers bonuses is weak. What stops that sort of gambling is proper checks and controls. And the banking crisis happened while we were in the Eu... although the problems were in America anyway primarily so whether EU had caps or not makes no difference. 

[newmodarmy]

//Allowing one country to unacceptably pollute the sea with raw sewage to the detriment of others, makes no sense at all.//

Another flawed examaple. Somebody listed some of the EU countries that also break the law, by far bigger margins than we do

[New Judge]

You still don' get it, Hymie.

Some of the measures you mention are quite sensible others are not, but I'm not debating the individual merits of each of them. That is not the issue. 

The issue is that membership of the EU requires a nation to relinquish the supremacy of its Parliament and instead be subject to legislation which may or may not be in its best interests. And the only way to ensure that is to restrict the power of he national legislature.

No countries outside the EU agree to their own domestic law and legislature being subservient to that of an unelected foreign body, especially when the interests of other nations might trump theirs. When you explain this to people from outside Europe most simply cannot believe it. 

"No, I don’t..."

I think you mean you do disagree [that decisions on such matters should be for national governments?].

If so that's fine. You don't have to defend EU laws or continually seek to illustrate how the UK's divergence from them is not to your liking.

People voted to leave the EU for many different reasons but one of the most important for me was that I believe the Westminster Parliament  should be supreme when it comes to matters concerning the UK. It was not whilst we were members of the EU.

I would rather see a dozen laws implemened from Westminster with which I didn't particularly agree than one imposed from Brussels with which I did. I make no bones about it - it's as simple as that. I don't need to defend UK law or criticise EU legislation. What either of them does is not important; it is who controls the levers to do it which is.

[Hymie]

I’ve always wondered why those Brexiteers phoning into LBC’s James O’Brien show; when asked what EU laws they object to (they all seem to have no answer), don’t say that they object to laws preventing the super-rich from being able to hide their wealth in secret off-shore tax-havens (thereby evading tax), or laws preventing UK’s bankers making investment gambles (thereby enriching the bankers) that could well see the tax-payers once again bailing out banks to the tune of billions of pounds, or laws preventing our water companies pumping unlimited amounts of raw sewage into our rivers and coastal waters, or laws preventing UK citizens from quaffing champagne from pint bottles – maybe I’ll ring James O’Brien and point out the above.

[davebro3]

Anyway it's reassuring to know that even multi-millionaires have "disasters" in their lives! I don't like Alan Sugar.

[davebro3]

BTW - He's not SIR Alan Sugar, he's Baron Sugar of Clapton! Berk.

[New Judge]

“…maybe I’ll ring James O’Brien and point out the above.”

If you do, please don’t pass on my regards. I have only a limited supply and the pompous, supercilious  and arrogant Mr O’Brien is not high on the list of those I’d like to have the pleasure of my compliments.

He has spent the last eight and a half years with no respect for anybody who is not a committed Europhile. He believes everybody should be of like mind (his) and is patronising and down right rude to anybody who isn’t. He simply refuses to countenance a contrary view.

Anyway, it seems we may be getting somewhere at last. When you speak to Mr O’Brien,  explain to him that if he posed the question to your acquaintance New Judge “What EU laws do you object to?” his answer would be “All of them.”  And that’s because it’s not what the EU does that I object to, but rather the fact that they can do it at all.

It’s really not that difficult to understand. But I don’t expect either you or Mr O’Brien to grasp it. I imagine Mr O’Brien’s response would be that I must obviously be a rabid, ill-educated, racist Little Englander (or similar). That’s a cross I’ll just have to bear but hopefully you can rise above his incredible sewer-level of arrogance.

[newmodarmy]

Hymie....you are indeed missing the point. It shouldn't be upto unelected E U officials to tell us what bankers bonuses or water quality levels or signage etc should be. It should be for our elected government. You need to lobby your MP or the party leaders on these issues and if this government isn't doing what you want on these issues you should find or form a party that will if they get elected. If you prefer EU rule rather than an elected national government you could always move to an E U country.