The Great Theresa May. By FAR the Worst Prime Minister that the UK has Ever had.

Methusala

Active Member
#61
The UK had a dream run when they decided to join the EU. London City was a world center for the finance biz (along with New York's Wall St). There was also probably some residual good will felt towards the pommies for their shared experience following WW2 and the cold war. They were given membership on unique terms, being able to retain the Sterling currency and sharing industrial developments such as Airbus.
However, the neocons, no doubt assisted by our own DIrty Digger, wished to keep the socialists away from the power levers. They therefor cooked up the idea that an appeal to nacent British nationalism (not to mention elitism remaining from the time of Empire) might help in electoral matters. Voila! Let's give the nasty EU the shove and go back to being 100% Brits.
It worked because readers of Murdoch press don't pay attention to the details, none of which were ever spelled out. Now they are stuck with an half baked (almost) no idea and are wandering around, dumbstruck and calling, "Where the fug'arewe?".
A nice lesson to those who don't believe politics is about paying attention to THE DETAILS.
 

spacesailor

Well-Known Member
#62
"being able to retain the Sterling currency"
Then why O why do the pom's have (Compulsory) to use the euro.
And buy their petrol in litres, while still talking in gallons, (ten gallon fuel tank).
Ireland took to the euro very quick, & no-one even speaks about the "Irish-pound" any more.
spacesailor
 

spacesailor

Well-Known Member
#64
I was told "all prices have to be in euro's"
Never saw ONE petrol pump with "pounds & gallons", including Wales, over the tree months I was having a look-a-round !. (lots with bank-card slots)
Never got a pound-note out of my bank account while there, and don't know any-one still there getting paid in P, S, & new pence.
Still they (bureaucrats) can have all the fuel pumps thrown out as quick as London can get every-one into Electric cars.
spacesailor
 

spacesailor

Well-Known Member
#68
I had tried a "card" bowser, with my brand new St George overseas money card, that they said was best for travelers,!
It didn't work. Very embarrassed, as I promised to share fuel cost.
It definitely, said Euro on the bowser, & my card was for English pounds .
It took the St george manager over an hour to get that sodding card to cough up any money.
I promptly put it ALL back into my ordinary account.
spacesailor
 

octave

Well-Known Member
#69
Spacey:

Petrol prices in England are quoted in pence per litre - fact!

petrol.jpg
Also, the UK do0es not use the Euro and never has "The United Kingdom has never sought to adopt the euro as its official currency for the duration of its membership of the European Union (EU), and secured an opt-out at the euro's creation via the Maastricht Treaty in 1992. "

United Kingdom and the euro - Wikipedia

Can you even use Euros in Britain???


First the "No You Can't" Answer
The official currency of the UK is the pound sterling.


Shops and service providers, as a rule, only take sterling. If you use a credit card, regardless of the currency in which you pay your bills, the card will be charged with sterling and your final credit card bill will reflect currency exchange differences and whatever fees your issuing bank levies on foreign exchange.


And Now for the "Yes, Maybe"
Some of the UK's bigger department stores, especially the London stores that are tourist attractions in themselves, will take euros and some other foreign currencies (US dollar, Japanese yen). Selfridges (all branches) and Harrods will both take sterling, euros and US dollars at their ordinary cash registers. Selfridges also takes Canadian dollars, Swiss francs and Japanese yen. Marks and Spencer does not take foreign currency at the cash registers but it, like other stores popular with visitors, has bureaux de change (literally foreign exchange desks where you can readily change money) - in most of its larger stores.

And About That "Maybe"

If you are thinking of spending euros in England or elsewhere in the UK keep in mind that:

  • Even if a shop takes foreign currency at its cash registers, your payment is still a foreign exchange transaction, subject to exchange rates - the difference in value between one currency and another.
  • Exchange rates calculated at the cash registers by stores that take euros may not be the best rates you can get, may be out of date, or may be subject to a small extra fee.
  • Shop assistants are not really accustomed to taking foreign currency and your transaction may take longer than you'd like.

  • Those stores that do take euros will generally only take euro notes - they will not take coins.
  • You will have to pay for your goods using one currency or another. You cannot pay for part of your purchase with euros and part of it with pounds sterling.
  • You are very unlikely to find retail shops that will exchange your euros for pounds sterling outside of London.
  • Even within the UK there are currency confusions. The Bank of Scotland and the Bank of Northern Ireland both issue their own versions of pounds sterling. The notes have different pictures and the coins have different engravings. Visits returning to London from Edinburgh or Belfast with Northern Irish or Scottish pounds often have difficulty with cashiers refusing to accept them - even though they are legal tender. So imagine trying to pay with euros.
Can You Use Your Leftover Euros in Britain?

Anyway, the notion that the evil Europeans have been forcing the UK to use Euro, like so many other things is total bollocks.

Anyway, seasons greetings Spacey
 

Marty_d

Well-Known Member
#70
I had tried a "card" bowser, with my brand new St George overseas money card, that they said was best for travelers,!
It didn't work. Very embarrassed, as I promised to share fuel cost.
It definitely, said Euro on the bowser, & my card was for English pounds .
It took the St george manager over an hour to get that sodding card to cough up any money.
I promptly put it ALL back into my ordinary account.
spacesailor
We just used our normal credit card. Worked fine everywhere including service stations, and the conversion rate wasn't terrible.
 

old man emu

Well-Known Member
#71
Before going to England a couple of years ago, I got some English paper money from one of the Big Four banks in Australia. Got to England and were told that the ten pound notes we had received in Australia were not longer legal tender. Apparently the design of the note had changed and the old notes were cancelled.

Went into a local Barclay's Bank to see if the notes could be exchanged and was told that the bank couldn't do anything for us unless we had an account with them. I can't remember how the problem was resolved, but new notes were obtained.
 
#72
I would go easy on Spacey, as, like most things, they aren't cut and dry. I was in the UK at the time the Euro first came in (I was responsible for implementing their currency triangulation rules in our company's software offering) and of course, I was here when the Eurozone replaced their country's currency with the Euro.. I think it was during the latter period that Stacey may have got his info.

It was being touted as a matter of time before the UK would accede to the Euro despite losing a plebiscite on it. We had the option of receiving our salaries in Euros paid into Euro accounts (and we were a small US company - many other companies offered it). Most major retail chains had announced they would take Euros and some had actually started it - including outside of London. So, Spacey's experience may have been correct at the time (why would he say something different), though I doubt it would have been Euros only - especially if it was South Wales. The idea of the Euro waned very quickly as its value dropped like a stone (probably because the UK didn't participate and it was seen that Germany was now propping up 10 other countries). Outside of the shops mentioned above, you won't see it anywhere (maybe a handful of shops in Edinburgh may take it).

The UK entered the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) in the mid 80s from memory. This was a calamitous move as far as the UK were concerned and certainly contributed to a disastrous impact on the economy and the pound. I wasn't here and admit I don't fully know/understand its mechanics, but the then PM John Major admitted they didn't listen to their constituents and basically did what the Europeans told them. In fact, he said that he and his Treasurer as well as other finance and markets related pollies bunkered down in No. 10 Downing street with the curtains drawn and refused to look at what was happening in the markets - an approach he admitted with hindsight was not the right one. People may be confusing this with the Euro when they talk about the UK being able to opt out of the Euro - the UK eventually pulled out of the ERM, which as I understand caused its eventual collapse.

I think a few things on this page need a bit of correction.. Firstly, it is not the general British public that think where the fugari when it comes to Brexit - they are thinking it of the politicians entrusted and well compensated to deliver Brexit amongst other things. As I have said before, I feel a bit sorry for May as she clearly is in way over her head and, after the no confidence vote, it is pretty clear even Boris thinks it is far easier slinging mud writing muck raking articles for one of the big papers (Times, I think) on a salary of around £200K per year (as well as drawing his parliamentary salary and perks - which is the nub of all British politics - parliament allows such flagrant conflicts of interest as long as they're declared). The politicians are trying to deliver a Brexit that very few if any of those who voted leave wanted - they wanted out... period. It is this inability to delivery a clean break (mainly because not only when the referendum was announced there was no plan, but also only when after the trigger was pulled were they then going to put together a strategy - and their handling of the EU negotiations as a divided administration only proved that).

The Murdoch press are definitely partisan; but there are other press companies that are definitely partisan the other way and are happy to use similar tactics - and heir readership is no more interested in the facts unless the facts align with their values - that is the problem - most of us like to hear the facts that resonate with our values. Each are prepared to portray information and misinformation to suit the goals of their controlling shareholders. The reality is nobody even knows what Brexit is going to look like let alone what will happen after it... there are many different pigs lining up to put their snouts at the trough...

1972 was not the first time that the UK, as a nation state that would easily qualify for membership, make an application. And all that goodwill from WW2 was long lost. Charles De Gaulle vetoed the UK's application in 1969 and opposed it throughout his tenure. It was only really with his resignation that the UK were admitted. At the time, it was to promote peace through tightening markets but had the four main freedoms of movement- goods and services, people and capital. However, those movements were based around commercial movements. This meant, for people, which is an issue, at the time, there was no right to welfare, etc. If there was work for someone, they couldn't be refused entry for that work and to compete with the locals for that work. But, as I understand, the original rules were there was no right of entry if there was no work for them (which included them establishing their own enterprise); there was no right to welfare and no right to have their families out.

In 1989, the Maastricht treat changed that promoting an ever increasing integration of the European people resulting in the concept or European Citizenship. Thiscaused great consternation in the UK (I don't know about other countries), however, as the EU was about 11 nation states with roughly the same levels of wealth and welfare, it was tolerated comfortably. IMHO, it is a fine concept as long as the member states are more or less equal as it allows people to move freely and settle where they are most comfortable - let's not forget there are over 1m Brits living in the EU, too. However, between about 2003 and 2007, the EU was expanded to 27 nation made up mainly of Eastern European countries. There was a huge migration, mainly to the UK due its favourable treatment of welfare and its relatively (then) lax laws making it easy to pilpher the system. This had a to fold effect: 1) local employees and contractors (especially the building trades) were under severe competition - which for the general population was not a bad thing as it made them up their rather paltry game, but it did reuce their income But of course, in their own country they were under seige by people who would live 12 to a 2 bedroom flat and send most of their proceeds back to Eastern Europe - hardly a level playing field. Secondly, the movement was unfettered - and overcrowding particularly in poorer areas where services and infrastructure was already at breaking point - with no further investment in those services - drove a deep resentment. It is easy for me to say that the EU is the best thing since sliced bread (I am a middle income professional - alledgedly); but to the tradie living in an already forgotten part of society (they were not too low income to get the massive injection of cash around the Olympics time), it was all too much to bear. And, apart from a few benevolent countries on earth - most of the population live in that category and there is little wonder the vote went they way it it. Look at the geopgraphics of the vote; Outside those aras well subsisdised by and invested in (London + South East, Scotland and a few wealthy counties), it was mainly Brexit. Yes, there was a certain degree of xenophobia/racism, but it really was more a protest vote and underinvestment (ironically, investment in those areas was mainly the result of the EU - London/Westminster for a long tome has neglected the midlands and the north).

It's still xmas day here and I have the family to tend to.. Brexit (and Europe) is not as cut and dry as people think and it doesn't work for everyone. I don't think a second referendum would change things to be honest - and many remainers on losing the vote were gracious and calling for it to happen as quicy as possible so as a nation we could heal and recover. It is the ruddy governement and their capitulations to vested interests (even their own) that is allowing it to descend into the farce it is.
 

spacesailor

Well-Known Member
#73
Jerry-Atrick
Many thanks.
I lived in Derby (Viking word for deer), bugger all came from the south to ease our lot there, I am one of half a dozen family's that left for the better life !.
Can you see aussie's have thee day old fish, that they say is FRESH .Used to be fresh as half a day old, until Londoner's made a law that ALL fish had to go to the big LONDON fish markets.(and then trucked all the way back north, were it was caught)
Every time something looked good those down south passed another law to keep the goodies in their own patch,
NASTY THATCHER, even closed the "mining college" at DENBY to please the euro crowd.
spacesailor
 

Methusala

Active Member
#74
Merry Xmas to all and to Jerry in particular for his comprehensive and well reasoned explanation of the current dilemna facing our British friends. Also to Spacesailor for his posts.
I am not English and have never been to Old Blighties' shores. I have no qualifications as an economist being self enlightened only through my reading.
I am distrustful of politicians, something that observation of their activities over my long years has strengthened. so, in justification of my views expressed in post #61, I will say;
1. Murdoch has not acted alone in corrupting the media whose function in an informed democracy is to properly inform the people. The Western media are acting more like a crooked cartel in echoing ideas for which there is no actual proof offered,eg. the ridiculous story that Russia was able to deflect the intentions of the mass of US voters to its will. I believe that Murdoch has been perhaps the ring leader in this corruption.
2. You cannot effectively,"Unscramble the eggs". Once Britain had become part of the EU it is simplistic in the extreme to think that this decision can be walked back to year zero and take an alternate path. Too much has changed and re-organisation will be very painful. This is where the attraction of a simple idea became popular. The detail was not thought about by the common voters and the media, with their great resources and responsibility to inform, failed absolutely.
3. It was my assumption that some positive sentiment towards Brittons could have been in play, to allow some rather privileged entry terms. Whether this was true or not, I still feel that they had a rather soft ride, especially being allowed to keep their currency. In re-negotiating their trading terms, the masters of the EU are determined not to repeat this post Brexit.
I am indebted to Jerry for his detailed analysis of the situation. I still believe that the voters have "bought a pup" and that GB will suffer from this decision. They are not by any means alone in this quandary and I recommend to readers Yanis Varoufakis' treatise on Greece's troubles, " And the Weak Suffer What They Must", for a deeper understanding of what monetary union (or membership of The EU) means. Regards Don
 

spacesailor

Well-Known Member
#75
M
To get a gist of what happened when the GB public were Hoodwinked into joining a NON Democratic entity, too be stript of their laws Their factories & their happiness.
DON"T look to London. look to the grimmy hard working North.
Similar to ROME at the height of their decadence.
I too distrust politicians, And many more Australians will be distrustful also, after this government's folly.
If a polly was NOT VOTED in. They shouldn't be selected to run this country.
spacesailor
 
Last edited:

octave

Well-Known Member
#76
M
To get a gist of what happened when the GB public were Hoodwinked into joining a NON Democratic entity, too be stript of their laws Their factories & their happiness.
DON"T look to London. look to the grimmy hard working North.
Similar to ROME at the height of their decadence.
I too distrust politicians, And many more Australians will be distrustful also, after this government's folly.
If a polly was NOT VOTED in. They shouldn't be selected to run this country.
spacesailor
My parents left the north of England in 1964 when I was a child. Back then the north of England, in particular my parents birth place Yorkshire was a hell of a lot poorer and grimier than it is today. Problem is it is easy to pop on the rose coloured glasses and think that back then everything was wonderful.
 
#77
I don't think it is a question of looking back with roe coloured specs.. When we discuss poverty, we discuss it in terms of today's average standard of living rather than what it was, say at the turn of the 18th century (to pick an arbitrary date). People classed as living in poverty today probably have a much better material lifestyle than the average back then - though compared to the average today, they are far worse off. Yes, there are those in abject poverty, bit even then, the access they have to support services are much higher.

And it is the same in comparing the north-south divide of the UK. 'Oop north, there things are undoubtedly less grimy and more sedate than they were.. and there is a decent amount of old money in various places up there. However, as compared to London/South East and Scotland, there is a clear difference in government investment and stimulation and it shows in terms of employment, access to services and even expected life-span differences. It is something the government have acknowledged, but ut seems to be a cultural thing here...
 

octave

Well-Known Member
#78
I don't think it is a question of looking back with roe coloured specs.. When we discuss poverty, we discuss it in terms of today's average standard of living rather than what it was, say at the turn of the 18th century (to pick an arbitrary date). People classed as living in poverty today probably have a much better material lifestyle than the average back then - though compared to the average today, they are far worse off. Yes, there are those in abject poverty, bit even then, the access they have to support services are much higher.

And it is the same in comparing the north-south divide of the UK. 'Oop north, there things are undoubtedly less grimy and more sedate than they were.. and there is a decent amount of old money in various places up there. However, as compared to London/South East and Scotland, there is a clear difference in government investment and stimulation and it shows in terms of employment, access to services and even expected life-span differences. It is something the government have acknowledged, but ut seems to be a cultural thing here...
I guess the big question is poverty in the UK under the EU worse than poverty in Australia and will Brexit mean that the poor in the UK will do better (i personaly dont know). My strong suspicion is that any financial burden caused by Brexit will not borne by
the so called elites but by the battlers.
 
#79
There is no doubt the poor and low income will bear a disproportionate burden compared to others.. It is always the way when administrative changes are applied across the board. But, if not the poor, then the low income were the very people who largely voted for Brexit and I firmly believe most understood, at least in the next 5 or so years, that it would make them poorer - just because one is low income doesn't mean they are brainless.

I also think they voted out of principle rather than hip pocket - for whatever reason, perceived or real, they wanted out. They knew it would cost them and they were prepared to pay the cost. There was also a protest vote and a bit of, "well, we're in a bad space - about time those tall poppies also felt it a little."

A Labour MP from oop North somewhere said she was conflicted - she was ardent pro-remain while more than 95% of her constituents who voted, voted leave. Yet, she decided she was going to fight tooth and nail against Brexit. She was reminded that members of parliament are supposed to represent her people, but she dismissed them as not knowing what they voted for. This is incredulity at its core and another reason pollies are suffering at the moment.. They are not understanding people's concerns and working to allay or even address them.. they have a one-dimension view and bu$$er anyone else..
 

spacesailor

Well-Known Member
#80
Otave
Did your parents own a "car" have a refrigerator. or go shopping & then not buying things because it wasn't AFFORDABLE.
Freezing in bed at night couldn't afford the coal. That's the reality I know,
Christmas, ONE ORANGE, & that was it.
Down south my uncles were out partying, payed for by their employer. Heaps of money near London,
Up north working in the mines or steel foundries, Still not enough after TAX, for owning your own House,
Huge difference from the children's point of view.
spacesailor
 
Top Bottom