Comments by "Nigel Johnson" (@nigeljohnson9820) on "Poll for UK newspaper finds large numbers want another Brexit vote" video.

The UK economy was significantly damaged by its years of eu membership.
6
@johnmacaroni105 not just during lock down, the UK funded its life style during its time as a member, through the sale of assets and by borrowing. The printing of funny money. The UK had to leave, it really could not afford to remain in the eu.
3
@justmythought7658 what power house, it was all based on smoke and mirrors, and creative accounting. It's easy to look rich if you are funding a lavish life style by selling the family silver, but what happens when it runs out? You rely on your past credit rating and borrow. You print money, and you pretend that building houses with imported raw materials, somehow makes you rich. You must be rich, look at all the foreign imports you are selling to each other. All those consumables destined for land fill. Anyone noticed how the eu has stealthily taken control of what we're international standards, once agreed by committees of sovereign Nations. Now only EU members are allowed to have a say in setting these standards. This is an example of the EU closed shop. The eu is run as a microcosm of globalisation. With the poorer regions used to make cheap goods to survive the richer regions. Just as globalisation has now been shown to be bad, so too is the system that binds the eu together.
3
@edwardbrady5843 and you need to stop misleading people with your revisionist history. I say again why was the UK the third largest contributor to the EU budget. The UK should have been a net recipient, based on your estimate of its economy. Any boom during eu membership was down to the sale of UK assets.
3
@edwardbrady5843 I told you I have retired, i don't need gainful employment. I also do not need to rerun the arguments of brexit. I voted against joining in the first place, it's a shame that other lacked the foresight to do likewise, we would be a lot better off. But the UK public were lied to at the time, they were sold the common market, not the federal state of Europe.
3
@edwardbrady5843 you are not forced to read my posts. But I would be interested in what might motivate you to stop replying, or better still give up on the internet altogether. It would save me having to put up with your misguided whining support for the EU, and the rehashing of the brexit debate. What is it, can't go to France to get you duty free alcohol? Thanks to climate change, wine growing will be moving to the UK very soon, and I understand that skiing trips to the alps will be off, as there is a shortage of snow. Well actually no snow at all. Maybe you are going to the French coast, for the sea food. You may find the flavour has changed, as its tainted by UK sewage, courtesy of the foreign owned water company.
3
What a relief, it save the task of campaigning to remain out.
3
And who did the independent ask?
2
@simonbilling2796 I suggest you look at the real state of the UK economy during the period of eu membership. Look at the borrowing, the money printing, and the sale of uk assets.
2
@realDanielAugustine correct, leaving an organisation that binds itself together by codependency was always going to be difficult. It was not made any better by the ridiculous claims the eu made in the divorce settlement. The UK had only just left when it was hit by the costs of the covid pandemic and then the energy costs of the illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine. The situation was not made any better by eu foreign policy, that failed to identify the obvious risks of being dependent of Russian gas and oil. Our lazy government was all to happy to sit back and let the eu make the big decisions.
2
@edwardbrady5843 I have lots of books, I worked in a research and development lab, as in electronics designer until I retired early with a good pension. Oddly I travelled to Europe several time, as part of my job.
2
@Britannia. after forty years of the eu making the UK dependent upon it, did you really think leaving was going to be easy. The UK lost control of its industrial standards, it lost huge sectors of industry, largely because the eu provided a prop to keep up the appearance of growth. The UK went along with the rediculus notion that Russia could be trusted to provide its energy needs in an almost just in time fashion. The funmental flaw is the myth that what is good for one member state is good for all. Since the states all have separate economies and taxation systems, moving industries for one state to another is NOT a zero sum gain. Deindustralising the UK in favour of Spain or Portugal, is not the same as moving an industry between counties of the UK. It was a UK loss. Another fallacy of UK eu membership, was that the UK would earn its living from international banking, services and construction. The former made a lot of money for the very few, and when thing went wrong the UK tax payer was left to pick up the bill. The latter two are parasitic industries, that actually do not create any real wealth. So the UK really could not afford to remain inside the eu any longer than it did, it was already funding its living expenses from debt, having little left of value to sell.
2
@edwardbrady5843 are you completely stupid. The way the eu keeps itself together is by setting up codependency. That is why supp.y lines stretch across Europe. It's why fruit from the far side of the eu is cheaper in the supermarkets than the same fruit grown in the local area. It is why the UK was forced buy eu rules to buy steel from other member states. The UK government dutifully obeyed the eu rules and directives, destroying UK industry. The UK has forty years of this destruction, now you wonder why the UK is struggling to compete. If the UK was the poor man of Europe when it joined, why did it end up paying one of the highest membership fees. Before you point the economic boom, associated with eu membership, you should know that this was funded by the sale of uk assets and by every increasing debt. The whole of the UK economy, during that period was based on smoke and mirrors, and creative accounting. The health of the UK economy was judged by how many houses it could, (using imported raw materials), and how well we could sell expensive imports to each other. It was the service and banking industry that boomed, neither of which are productive, neither of which actually increased the wealth of the country. Did you really think that the UK could recover for a forty plus year long parasitic infection so quickly. It was always going to be painful, even without the cost of the covid pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. We have had decades of lazy ineffective government, that was happy to live off the profits from the sale of tax payer assets, gas, electric generation and distribution, rail, airports, ports. The list is long. Is it a surprise to you that the UK is struggling to make a profit, when so much of value in the UK is now foreign owned, and the profits are exported offshore, never to return to the UK economy. Successive UK government's have failed to understand that foreign investment is bad for the economy. By definition, a foreign investor expects to take out more than they put in. UK industries than are not foreign owned have been destroyed. The UK imports most of its electronics, computers, telecommunication equipment. Industrial machinery. How do you think these things are paid for, where does the money come from? EU rules have destroyed output farming industry. The government did not object, because rich land owners, many sitting in the house of lords, got a nice income from the eu farming subsidy. What we are suffering now, is the effect of decades of government mismanagement, assisted by EU membership. Rejoining the eu will not fix this, it will only make it worse. The EU will not allow the troublesome, poor, UK to rejoin. It wants the UK as a vassal state. Something it can further exploit. Those in government wanting to rejoin, are looking for someone else to bail them out. They will be disappointed, as the eu has allowed the UK to be sucked dry. Do you really think they will allow the UK to join, when it is likely to be a net beneficiary from the eu funds? Not a chance.
1
@edwardbrady5843 if the UK was the sick man of Europe, why was its economy seen as so strong that it needed to be the third largest contributed to the eu budget? Why was it not a net recipient of development funds. Can you deny that the UK funded its living costs from the sale of assets? There was not a boom period in the eu, it was just a time why the UK was allowed to borrow on the basis of its past credit rating. It was eu rules that made it so easy for UK assets to be sold. If you want to know why the UK was so sick when it joined the eu, it must be remembered that it was still paying of its WWII debts, and has failed to renew its industrial equipment. Much of uk industry was still using pre war equipment well, into the 1960 and beyond. You are clearly deluded into being a europhile. The eu is corrupt, that has recently been demonstrated. It's federalist ambitions have been temporarily halted by the war in Ukraine, but they will continue to grind on, as it is essential for the eu's financial survival. They have not given up on having a federal government, but their plans for expansion have met the reality of the need for NATO protection. The EU is still an evil organisation, it's just that the much greater evil of Putin's Russia has overshadowed it, and highlighted its weakness.
1
@edwardbrady5843 it is you who are embarrassing yourself, by simply denying published history. Do you deny that the eu is corrupt? Do you deny that it has a federalist agenda? Do you deny the at eu rules have worked to destroy UK industry? Do you deny that the UK was the third largest contributor to the eu budget? Do you deny that eu rules made it easier for UK assets to fall into foreign ownership? Do you deny that the UK financed its living expenses by the sale of assets and the printing of money?
1
@edwardbrady5843 your arrogance is an embarrassment. You think you understand, but you don't.
1
@eugenieponleve667 sorry that you do not understand the concept of one person, one vote. It's called democracy.
1
@NoName-hg6cc north sea oil, actually it belongs to the Shetland Isles. If you want to be parochial.
1
@edwardharris5301 UK airports are owned by BAA, which in turn is owned by a Spanish firm. It was a UK publicly owned asset, sold by the Thatcher government. The UK might regain control using laws and regulations, to make the ownership less attractive for foreign owners.
1
@edwardbrady5843 it seem that you confuse argument with ridicule. The later just confirms your ignorance. At least I have the satisfaction of knowing brexit happened and will be near impossible to reverse. So all your bluster and insults are impotent. You lost the argument on the 23nd of June 2016, and that is really all that matters.
1
@eugenieponleve667 not under the terms of the referendum. It was a single issue vote, where every vote counted equally, and was therefore the most democratic decision the UK has ever taken. Under your scenario it would be the tail wagging the dog. There was not reason that a minority should be allowed to overrule the wishes of the majority,
1