UK Politics & Brexit Discussion

[Honey Honey]

Spin is part of all elections. It's disingenuous to deligitimise one election for spin and not all of the others. Why does it matter so virulently to some now? Simple, historically under Labour and the Conservatives life doesn't immediately change for most that much. You bemoan the spin but get on with it in the knowledge that you'll survive. Without that past reference of security and with the assumption that everything is going to hell in a hand basket because of Brexit it is suddenly the be all and end all. It's brought to the forefront on an assumption due to the lack of historical reference. 

[Kowabunga]

2 hours ago, Harvsky said:

Read my post again.

It says "Immigration was part of a wider package" and why that appears the case.

I don't think you understood the post at all. You just doubled down instead of tackling the points raised in it. 

The way I see it from afar, stopping freedom of movement was a core element (probably the most prominent part of the package , as it was the most easy to communicate in slogans along the supposed money fluxes) in the leave campaign (not to say that element punctually carried even more radical ethnocentric ideas using dogwhistles). In any case, I fail to get the latest spin of Fairy's Boots' narrative. I mean, his/her particular idea of british excepcionalism (we the common folk will be better producing and selling "goods" outside because...). Because the only british exceptionalism (a differential factor you can take for granted in the mid term) you can argue about these days is London being the crooked world centre of the world of financial services (which it is mostly elite-driven and not about producing real stuff). A real check on chauvinism is needed.

In any case I am interested to see what happens now. As I wrote here before, a second referendum without actually getting to exit is not the best option for british democracy short term (the UK would probably become an antipolitical hellhole, worse than Italy in this regard), but a second referendum for re-entry taken soon after brexit without time for much divergence would make some sense. But the most probable outcome, I think, is this deal or crashing out with no deal.

[SirBalon]

Considering the three largest constituency majorities in the UK that voted for leave (from what I'm to believe), they had the lowest amount of immigrants residing within their council but yet when quizzed recently on the reasons as to why they voted in the way they did, the residing factor was immigration and then sovereignty.  One of those constituencies only had one foreign family living there that owned a local mini supermarket.  Both immigration and sovereignty have been proved to not to enter into any of the real issues that have ever affected this country...  Infact the stats show that we've had more immigration coming in from outside the EU in the past 25 years and where government benefit handouts are concerned immigrants from either the EU or outside the EU territory are extremely low, much lower than native benefit users.

We could go on and on and on with all the false propaganda fed to us over the years.  Even the low wages have nothing to do with immigrants being prepared to take less because the lack of pay rises compared to inflation goes further back than the EU accord and actually has more to do with the death of unions (syndicates). 

All of this and more, much much more is the bullshit that was fed to us.  We can start by going back the the lady that actually started it all with an ideal based on a future EU which was fully supported and part of the creation of it all... Mrs Thatcher and what then subsequently ruined the working classes by privatising and selling it all.

blah blah blah blah sovereignty, dirty immigrants, we don't want to be ruled, they're gonna bend our bananas. Blah blah meeeeh, meeeeeh, maaaah, drivel drivel drivel I'm proud to be Brithsh... Get outa here and DON'T HAVE CHILDREN PLEEEEASE!

[Kowabunga]

2 minutes ago, SirBalon said:

Considering the three largest constituency majorities in the UK that voted for leave (from what I'm to believe), they had the lowest amount of immigrants residing within their council but yet when quizzed recently on the reasons as to why they voted in the way they did, the residing factor was immigration and then sovereignty.  One of those constituencies only had one foreign family living there that owned a local mini supermarket.  Both immigration and sovereignty have been proved to not to enter into any of the real issues that have ever affected this country...  Infact the stats show that we've had more immigration coming in from outside the EU in the past 25 years and where government benefit handouts are concerned immigrants from either the EU or outside the EU territory are extremely low, much lower than native benefit users.

We could go on and on and on with all the false propaganda fed to us over the years.  Even the low wages have nothing to do with immigrants being prepared to take less because the lack of pay rises compared to inflation goes further back than the EU accord and actually has more to do with the death of unions (syndicates). 

All of this and more, much much more is the bullshit that was fed to us.  We can start by going back the the lady that actually started it all with an ideal based on a future EU which was fully supported and part of the creation of it all... Mrs Thatcher and what then subsequently ruined the working classes by privatising and selling it all.

blah blah blah blah sovereignty, dirty immigrants, we don't want to be ruled, they're gonna bend our bananas. Blah blah meeeeh, meeeeeh, maaaah, drivel drivel drivel I'm proud to be Brithsh... Get outa here and DON'T HAVE CHILDREN PLEEEEASE!

Gibraltar español.

[SirBalon]

7 minutes ago, Kowabunga said:

Gibraltar español.

That's how desperate and how un-British the whole thing is right now.  So little has been made of what occurred over the past week and how easy it all was due to Spain saying they'd boycott the summit and veto the agreement (coupled with France, although with France they've been the main culprits of the difficulties in any agreement over the past year).

[SirBalon]

 

[Kowabunga]

1 minute ago, SirBalon said:

That's how desperate and how un-British the whole thing is right now.  So little has been made of what occurred over the past week and how easy it all was due to Spain saying they'd boycott the summit and veto the agreement (coupled with France, although with France they've been the main culprits of the difficulties in any agreement over the past year).

I don't know really to what extent the latest ruckus was perfidious Albion trying to be perfidious or Pedro Sánchez trying to score a cheap electoral point. It seems obvious however that since article 50 was activated, the Spanish Government has tried to position itself in the upcoming negotiations for a new statu quo with no real end-game in sight but in terms of changing the balance of the current relationship with Gib to a less damaging one. The latest tirade as I have said, I don't know, but the whole Spanish Government stance, I think it is rather compatible with the proverbial Hammurabi's "what comes around goes around" logical process, seeing how the Spanish Government was forced to accept certain conditions wrt Gib set by the UK, member of the EU club, when they entered the EU club in 1986.

IMO, the unbritish thing was setting for a really bad starting hand after voting to exit without ever taking into consideration UK & Friends is bigger than England and thus, Northern Ireland (and as sidenote Gib) would place the UK in a sorry position to deal with the EU. Who knows in any case how those negotiations will fare up and, long term, what "weapons" may Gibraltarians have at their disposal to confront a potential geopolitical long term drift (maybe both the tax-haven-low-regulation-smuggling current environments as well as also the possibility of developing a super-port in partnership with Tanger-Med).

[Honey Honey]

6 minutes ago, Kowabunga said:

The way I see it from afar, stopping freedom of movement was a core element (probably the most prominent part of the package , as it was the most easy to communicate in slogans along the supposed money fluxes) in the leave campaign (not to say that element punctually carried even more radical ethnocentric ideas using dogwhistles). In any case, I fail to get the latest spin of Fairy's Boots' narrative. I mean, his/her particular idea of british excepcionalism (we the common folk will be better producing and selling "goods" outside because...). Because the only british exceptionalism (a differential factor you can take for granted in the mid term) you can argue about these days is London being the crooked world centre of the world of financial services (which it is mostly elite-driven and not about producing real stuff). A real check on chauvinism is needed.

In any case I am interested to see what happens now. As I wrote here before, a second referendum without actually getting to exit is not the best option for british democracy short term (the UK would probably become an antipolitical hellhole, worse than Italy in this regard), but a second referendum for re-entry taken soon after brexit without time for much divergence would make some sense. But the most probable outcome, I think, is this deal or crashing out with no deal.

Absolutely it is a core element, but the key is that it is interlocked with the wider package. May's deal bombed among political leave because in part it has assumed that immigration is a singular matter. It fundamentally considers leave in accordance with a caricature.

It may have been a singular matter to non politically active voters, as in folk who barely follow everday events. The remain commentariat really honed in on those singular issue voters post ref. Caricturing leave as a buffoon from Barnsley for example. 

The heart of the domestic issue is that the UK is trying to leave the EU by referendum and not by political party. A second referendum that stops this Brexit and forces the next election into party splits could be a solution of some sorts. There may like in Denmark in the early 90s be a few days of violent riots.

[SirBalon]

1 minute ago, Kowabunga said:

IMO, the unbritish thing was setting for a really bad starting hand after voting to exit without ever taking into consideration UK & Friends is bigger than England and thus, Northern Ireland (and as sidenote Gib) would place the UK in a sorry position to deal with the EU. Who knows in any case how those negotiations will fare up and, long term, what "weapons" may Gibraltarians have at their disposal to confront a potential geopolitical long term drift (maybe both the tax-haven-low-regulation-smuggling current environments as well as also the possibility of developing a super-port in partnership with Tanger-Med).

Mate... There are very intelligent people (British people) that very quickly (although admitting that they were also ignorant at the start to the whole Brexit thing but soon cottoned on although too late) understood how ridiculous the whole thing was and how we stood to lose more than gain in any leaving scenario.

Take for example the most used one about "The EU sell too much to us and wouldn't want to lose our custom base like for example the Germans with their cars!"... It has already been proved in the past few months with actions from those in Europe especially using the German motor vehicle industry that they couldn't give a damn about our custom in the larger scale of things where membership to the EU is concerned.  We'll still buy their products like we'll buy everyone else's only that we'll pay more for them. This without going into how even industries from outside the EU that have the EU as a specialist profit market having moved out of the UK recently or simply based more emphasis on EU support and their decisions...

All this because here in the UK we thought that everyone else was an underclass and that we were superior to all of them. They don't buy BMWs or Merecedes in Spain, France, Italy, Belgium etc... 

They're all poor! 

[Honey Honey]

11 minutes ago, SirBalon said:

Mate... There are very intelligent people (British people) that very quickly (although admitting that they were also ignorant at the start to the whole Brexit thing but soon cottoned on although too late) understood how ridiculous the whole thing was and how we stood to lose more than gain in any leaving scenario.

Take for example the most used one about "The EU sell too much to us and wouldn't want to lose our custom base like for example the Germans with their cars!"... It has already been proved in the past few months with actions from those in Europe especially using the German motor vehicle industry that they couldn't give a damn about our custom in the larger scale of things where membership to the EU is concerned.  We'll still buy their products like we'll buy everyone else's only that we'll pay more for them. This without going into how even industries from outside the EU that have the EU as a specialist profit market having moved out of the UK recently or simply based more emphasis on EU support and their decisions...

All this because here in the UK we thought that everyone else was an underclass and that we were superior to all of them. They don't buy BMWs or Merecedes in Spain, France, Italy, Belgium etc... 

They're all poor! 

There have been plenty of warnings against no deal from German industry. There was one the other week from the BDI.

It is completely economically illiterate to assume if the price of a BMW goes up substantially then the number of sales won't fall. Some consumers will move to alternatives particularly as the British car market is driven by credit creation and is one of the biggest bubbles in the economy, unless you have evidence that credit supply would increase with the increased price?

[Kowabunga]

27 minutes ago, SirBalon said:

Mate... There are very intelligent people (British people) that very quickly (although admitting that they were also ignorant at the start to the whole Brexit thing but soon cottoned on although too late) understood how ridiculous the whole thing was and how we stood to lose more than gain in any leaving scenario.

Take for example the most used one about "The EU sell too much to us and wouldn't want to lose our custom base like for example the Germans with their cars!"... It has already been proved in the past few months with actions from those in Europe especially using the German motor vehicle industry that they couldn't give a damn about our custom in the larger scale of things where membership to the EU is concerned.  We'll still buy their products like we'll buy everyone else's only that we'll pay more for them. This without going into how even industries from outside the EU that have the EU as a specialist profit market having moved out of the UK recently or simply based more emphasis on EU support and their decisions...

All this because here in the UK we thought that everyone else was an underclass and that we were superior to all of them. They don't buy BMWs or Merecedes in Spain, France, Italy, Belgium etc... 

They're all poor! 

Any analysis of trade of goods that doesn't take China into account is myopic, in my opinion.

37 minutes ago, Harvsky said:

Absolutely it is a core element, but the key is that it is interlocked with the wider package. May's deal bombed among political leave because in part it has assumed that immigration is a singular matter. It fundamentally considers leave in accordance with a caricature.

Probably, I am wild-guessing here, deal bombed because people feel cheated because they feel trapped, not because the trap gives you more or less room in terms of economic autonomy.

 

 

Edited November 26, 2018 by Kowabunga

[SirBalon]

15 minutes ago, Harvsky said:

There have been plenty of warnings against no deal from German industry. There was one the other week from the BDI.

It is completely economically illiterate to assume if the price of a BMW goes up substantially then the number of sales won't fall. Some consumers will move to alternatives particularly as the British car market is driven by credit creation and is one of the biggest bubbles in the economy, unless you have evidence that credit supply would increase with the increased price?

I don't mate and you know I don't because there is no evidence on that but without a doubt the credit industry will facilitate what for them will be a negligent rise in prices compared to those purchasing such goods and being able to cover their monthly dues.  The fall in purchases thus wouldn't be a clean one and enough sales would be met by comparison to making a stance against member states.

Thats an assumption (thank goodness I'm admitting to this and not pronouncing it as gospel as did the campaigners pre-Brexit referendum).

What's for sure is that a global market is much more important than our island on its own rather than upsetting the apple cart.

[SirBalon]

17 minutes ago, Kowabunga said:

Any analysis of trade of goods that doesn't take China into account is myopic, in my opinion.

In the benefit of who?

The EU already have trade agreements with China which is where the WTO stance with some Brexiteers loses credence because the EU as the UK already trade with nations outside the EU borders.

[Kowabunga]

1 minute ago, SirBalon said:

In the benefit of who?

The EU already have trade agreements with China which is where the WTO stance some Brexiteers loses credence because the EU as the UK already trade with nations outside the EU borders.

Ugh, in my antropologically pessimist framing of the situation (which I seem to share with Mr. Trump), countries should be wary of China, instead of welcoming that soon-to-be-ultimate-totalitarian state pulling a Bienvenido Mr. Marshall. I mean in the sense of the need for creating "entities" of bigger scale (both economical, political, and even military) to confront that in Europe, instead of the nation-state folding. The road towards that goal is full of dangers and dead-ends, though.

 

[SirBalon]

1 minute ago, Kowabunga said:

Ugh, in my antropologically pessimist framing of the situation (which I seem to share with Mr. Trump), countries should be wary of China, instead of welcoming that soon-to-be-ultimate-totalitarian state pulling a Bienvenido Mr. Marshall. I mean in the sense of the need for creating "entities" of bigger scale (both economical, political, and even military) to confront that in Europe, instead of the nation-state folding. The road towards that goal is full of dangers and dead-ends, though.

 

Of course it's full of traps but that doesn't and hasn't stopped modern consumerist ideologies until now.  Somehow, some way and in a galaxy far far away hypocrisy has managed to separate both things.  Viva Saudi Arabia!

[Kowabunga]

1 minute ago, SirBalon said:

Of course it's full of traps but that doesn't and hasn't stopped modern consumerist ideologies until now.  Somehow, some way and in a galaxy far far away hypocrisy has managed to separate both things.  Viva Saudi Arabia!

Man, it is not moral standpoint. I prefer "my world" remaining "liberal" and autonomous from superpowers taken out of dystopic scifi novels. Barring buying into Nazi conspiracy theories of Eurabia, Saudi medieval theocracy doesn't affect it that much, to be honest. A dystopic totalitarian hightech China is however a direct threat to that.

[SirBalon]

34 minutes ago, Kowabunga said:

Man, it is not moral standpoint. I prefer "my world" remaining "liberal" and autonomous from superpowers taken out of dystopic scifi novels. Barring buying into Nazi conspiracy theories of Eurabia, Saudi medieval theocracy doesn't affect it that much, to be honest. A dystopic totalitarian hightech China is however a direct threat to that.

Of course I get that but it's a blanket pensive accountancy of hypocritical outlooks on a platform fed by nationalism which is my argument.

[Honey Honey]

21 minutes ago, SirBalon said:

I don't mate and you know I don't because there is no evidence on that but without a doubt the credit industry will facilitate what for them will be a negligent rise in prices compared to those purchasing such goods and being able to cover their monthly dues.  The fall in purchases thus wouldn't be a clean one and enough sales would be met by comparison to making a stance against member states.

Thats an assumption (thank goodness I'm admitting to this and not pronouncing it as gospel as did the campaigners pre-Brexit referendum).

What's for sure is that a global market is much more important than our island on its own rather than upsetting the apple cart.

A lot of car finance is backed by the car industry themselves so that's not smart. 

I'm not sure what basis there is for assuming the EU or industry within it is ok with no deal. Strategically it would risk increasing the UK's pivot to other markets. I would argue that the EU has shown it's strong desire to prevent this. 

In any FTA trade offs on specific aspects of the market must be made. The unique position for Britain is that we are potentially taking away market competitiveness and advantage for some EU firms. This is fairly unprecedented in trade negotiations and why there is a genuine risk of a worse deal than EFTA.

[SirBalon]

1 minute ago, Harvsky said:

A lot of car finance is backed by the car industry themselves so that's not smart. 

I'm not sure what basis there is for assuming the EU or industry within it is ok with no deal. Strategically it would risk increasing the UK's pivot to other markets. I would argue that the EU has shown it's strong desire to prevent this. 

In any FTA trade offs on specific aspects of the market must be made. The unique position for Britain is that we are potentially taking away market competitiveness and advantage for some EU firms. This is fairly unprecedented in trade negotiations and why there is a genuine risk of a worse deal than EFTA.

Indeed... The UK are excluding themselves from having a say in their own market, the market their geographical position on being a Euroean nation excludes them from. Brand names like the ones we are talking about will survive Britian's lack of competitiveness and self exclusion. It's a hit, a decent hit, but one that can be lived with considering the implications of going against the free market they belong to.

Britain doesn't buy more BMWs than what it's all worth on a continental basis.

[Danny]

8 hours ago, Harvsky said:

Read my post again.

It says "Immigration was part of a wider package" and why that appears the case.

I don't think you understood the post at all. You just doubled down instead of tackling the points raised in it. 

I mean my initial post was a response to Fairy's constant portrayal of Remain voters living in a bubble/not knowing why people voted for Brexit...had little to do with approval ratings.

[Fairy In Boots]

5 hours ago, Danny said:

I mean my initial post was a response to Fairy's constant portrayal of Remain voters living in a bubble/not knowing why people voted for Brexit...had little to do with approval ratings.

Nope Harv summed it up, you have an element of remainers who like to portray leave voters as “buffoons from Barnsley” as he called it. They tend to be what I described in the earlier post, both sides are guilty of pigeonholing the other. There’s some truth to it though, the “buffoon’s from Barnsley” we’re labour switched to UKIP handed Cameron a majority voted leave then returned to Labour and took Mays majority away. They’re generally thick fuckers that hate brown people read the sun and whine that st George’s day causes offence. And on the other side of the spectrum you have guardianista types who think they know it all in their hubris but actually in reality they know fuck all.  

 I’ve acknowledged immigration was a factor, although have argued that it wasn’t solely that alone. You seem to think it was the only factor, and never really counter any other point, so I’ve stopped caring  enough to dignify you all with a response unless I can be arsed tbh. 

 This whole fucking thread has become an echo chamber as has much of this section of the forum really, the same 4-5 ppl agreeing with each other unilaterally on each topic. Disagree and you’ve crossed the line into “UKipper” “EDL” or “homophobe” territory, it’s become a corner of the Internet populated by some kind of bizarre virtue signalling circle jerk. 

At this point if you think the centralising of power for all 27 states is a “good thing” I’ve lost hope for you irrespective of any valid point you may have about economic volatility after the divorce (which I said I expected before the vote btw). The fact that those who extort the virtues of remain sit there doing so in a country that is made up of different states and is a historical example of why centralised power doesn’t work and the resultant struggles that ensue to resolve the issue once it becomes apparent that it’s not the best idea, makes it even more humorous.

It was very much about sovereignty, if it’s not about sovereignty Balon then can you talk me through the finer points of Spain’s monetary policy that they set completely themselves and has absolutely nothing to do with the EU as a whole, that has produced such a sterling showing in the youth unemployment figures?

Edited November 26, 2018 by Fairy In Boots

[Danny]

53 minutes ago, Fairy In Boots said:

Nope Harv summed it up, you have an element of remainers who like to portray leave voters as “buffoons from Barnsley” as he called it. They tend to be what I described in the earlier post, both sides are guilty of pigeonholing the other. There’s some truth to it though, the “buffoon’s from Barnsley” we’re labour switched to UKIP handed Cameron a majority voted leave then returned to Labour and took Mays majority away. They’re generally thick fuckers that hate brown people read the sun and whine that st George’s day causes offence. And on the other side of the spectrum you have guardianista types who think they know it all in their hubris but actually in reality they know fuck all.  

 I’ve acknowledged immigration was a factor, although have argued that it wasn’t solely that alone. You seem to think it was the only factor, and never really counter any other point, so I’ve stopped caring  enough to dignify you all with a response unless I can be arsed tbh. 

 This whole fucking thread has become an echo chamber as has much of this section of the forum really, the same 4-5 ppl agreeing with each other unilaterally on each topic. Disagree and you’ve crossed the line into “UKipper” “EDL” or “homophobe” territory, it’s become a corner of the Internet populated by some kind of bizarre virtue signalling circle jerk. 

At this point if you think the centralising of power for all 27 states is a “good thing” I’ve lost hope for you irrespective of any valid point you may have about economic volatility after the divorce (which I said I expected before the vote btw). The fact that those who extort the virtues of remain sit there doing so in a country that is made up of different states and is a historical example of why centralised power doesn’t work and the resultant struggles that ensue to resolve the issue once it becomes apparent that it’s not the best idea, makes it even more humorous.

It was very much about sovereignty, if it’s not about sovereignty Balon then can you talk me through the finer points of Spain’s monetary policy that they set completely themselves and has absolutely nothing to do with the EU as a whole, that has produced such a sterling showing in the youth unemployment figures?

I mean I'm pretty sure I've never said that people's reasoning behind Brexit was solely immigration but whatever floats your boat.

But it was one of the biggest reasons and arguably the biggest reason behind the vote going through. Echo chamber or not to ignore that would be silly. EU migrants, Muslims and immigrants in general have been treated like shit throughout this whole process.

You also have form for reverting to the "you don't know what it's like to live here" argument. Hence my initial post.

[SirBalon]

19 minutes ago, Danny said:

I mean I'm pretty sure I've never said that people's reasoning behind Brexit was solely immigration but whatever floats your boat.

But it was one of the biggest reasons and arguably the biggest reason behind the vote going through. Echo chamber or not to ignore that would be silly. EU migrants, Muslims and immigrants in general have been treated like shit throughout this whole process.

You also have form for reverting to the "you don't know what it's like to live here" argument. Hence my initial post.

I was about to answer you myself in my own words because this is something I know quite a bit about and it's a historical vicious circle in Spain that has various reasons behind high youth unemployment  I've witnessed it various times throughout my life and I lived in Spain for 10 years while witnessing it about to occur again before I returned to London.

In the end I though it better to try and find an article that explained it better and in an easier manner to you but found it difficult at first to find one in English as I didn't want to translate it as that defeated the object and put me into a problem of having to work hard for nothing because you are never going to change your mind, you continue to want to drive your car into the fire while its doused in petrol.

Luckily in the end the New York Times came to my rescue and I'm thankful for it.

Another thing...  Don't worry about the monetary system too much as here were talking about the UK leaving the EU and the UK aren't in the single currency (the Euro Zone).

There are no mysteries mate... The EU isn't a perfect system because a perfect system doesn't exist.  But it's a hell of a lot better than what we voted for, of that I can guarantee you as FACT not some rhetoric those you choose to listen to or read.

Wake up, I advise you to do it now mate and I'm not being condescendingly  come to your senses and forget the bullshit because you're being fed lies and fables.  Don't let pride get the better of you, I changed my mind and felt like a fool once I started to study the situation in depth for myself AND ONLY THEN, ONLY AFTER THAT started to listen to and read the right people because I was on the right path.  Although it's probably for no use in the end if this disaster continues...

Heres the article copied and pasted and at the bottom the link.

 

It was welcome news Friday when Europe’s economies reportedhigher-than-expected growth. The region, after all, has had to deal with rolling debt crises, terrorist attacks, an influx of refugees and migrants, and the possibility that Britain may vote to leave the European Union.

Then there is Spain. Across Europe, economic growth has helped bring the unemployment rate down. But in Spain, the rate is 20 percent, according to European Union surveys, and has been above that level for over five years, even as the country’s economy has been recovering.

You’d be forgiven for thinking that such a high level of joblessness, weighing on families for so long, would have caused the country to crack by now. The jobless number is so much higher than the rate for other economic laggards like Italy (11 percent) and Portugal (12 percent).

Certainly, some of Spain’s unemployment is overstated because some workers have off-the-books jobs. And people may feel optimistic because unemployment has fallen in recent quarters, from 25 percent two years ago.

Still, Spanish officials recently said they did not expect the jobless rate to fall below 15 percent until 2019. And there’s the matter of the country’s youth unemployment (those under 25): an almost incomprehensible 45.5 percent.

A new government in Spain — once it is chosen after almost half a year of discord — may end up pursuing smarter and bolder policies that reduce joblessness to levels that exist elsewhere in Europe.

But the chances of that look slim.

Spain’s unemployment is so high partly because of particular local forces that have existed for decades. Marcel Jansen, an expert on labor markets at the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, notes that unemployment above 20 percent is not uncommon in Spain. In fact, it has been at that level in three periods since Spain’s transition to democracy in the 1970s. And, ominously, from the previous unemployment rate peak in the 1990s, it took 14 years for it to decline to the wider European level, Mr. Jansen notes.

One cause of the high rate became embedded in Spain’s labor market over the last 40 years. A significant proportion of Spain’s workers emerged from the dictatorship years with ironclad job security. Many of those protections remained, Mr. Jansen said, but much of the new hiring in the democratic era took place through temporary employment contracts. Just before the 2008 financial crisis, around a third of Spain’s workers were on temporary contracts, far higher than the European average.

When the crisis hit, it was very easy to lay off the temporary workers. True, during the recent recovery, the high use of temporary contracts has most likely spurred Spanish firms to bolster their hiring. But the persistence of overly protective labor contracts alongside temporary ones with too few protections has probably also created inefficiencies within Spanish companies that have dampened economic growth.

Mr. Jansen’s preferred solution is to introduce a new contract that could increase protections for temporary workers and loosen them for many permanent workers. But he said Spain’s politicians had shown little support for this idea.

Something else is making matters worse right now. Much of Spain’s working-age population does not have an education beyond high school. And many of those people have remained unemployed for multiple years after the financial crisis of 2008. (Nearly a fourth of the unemployed have been without work for four years or more.)

Such workers are increasingly losing contact with the industries they worked in, and that will make it even harder for them to find jobs. And hiring in Spain’s construction industry, a big employer before the crisis, is not likely to return to precrisis levels anytime soon. Mr. Jansen says helping the long-term unemployed requires a substantial overhaul of Spain’s retraining programs. But this costs money, and Spain has one of the largest budget deficits in Europe.

This is where we bump into the big economic debate that looms over the Continent. On one side are those who insist that struggling countries must pursue policies that cut government spending and free up markets, to spur strong and sustainable growth. As we have learned, Spain’s labor market could certainly do with some big changes. But as we have also seen, these changes are far from imminent. They are expensive. They threaten entrenched interests. Spain’s leaders are so divided that they can’t form an administration that could attempt bold moves.

Economists on the other side of the debate emphasize the need for the European Union as a whole to come together to introduce big top-down actions. Such policies include debt forgiveness and far greater fiscal stimulus. Spain’s sky-high unemployment has not moved Europe’s leaders to take such steps by now. Then again, Europe can’t count on Spain — or any country — to tolerate this high level of joblessness forever.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/03/upshot/spains-jobless-numbers-almost-look-like-misprints.html

[Dr. Gonzo]

TF365’s Muslim hating culture warrior is insisting that immigration played a small part in Brexit and I am to take that seriously? 

[SirBalon]

Official statement from the British Chancellor this monring. That's just a screenshot of the news.

But yet I’m pretty sure the unicornists will continue to believe in unicorns and that we ALL need to believe because that’s the reason things are going to be awful.

That, and I’m sure that the blame will be put on governmental individuals that are really REMAINERS and that there’s a conspiratorial agenda going on to thwart British Independence LaLaLand.