Young Master Smeet
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Well, vote leave are trying to make a case:http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/briefing_trade
Quote:After we Vote Leave, British businesses will trade freely with the EU. Many countries around the world trade with the EU without accepting the supremacy of EU law.This is flat out wrong, no trade deal comes without an arbitration mechanism which will mean whatever trade deal will take priority over Parliamentary legislation (Dominic Grive, former Tory Attorney General has found:
Quote:If you were to assume the modern era began in 1834, where regular recording began in what later became the Foreign Office, these treaty experts have told me that there are some 13,200 records of treaties and agreements which the United Kingdom signed and ratified. Many thousands of these agreements are still applicable, and they range in importance from the United Nations Charter, to local treaties over fishing rights or maritime access.and
Quote:Of these, perhaps around 700 treaties contain reference to the possibility of binding dispute settlement. Today, all treaties must be laid before Parliament, where they may be debated, and if they involve the need to change UK law Parliament must scrutinise and enact any necessary legislation before the UK consents to be bound. In this age of globalisation, activities previously considered of domestic scope often have an international component – whether on coordinated economic action, climate change or on the regulation of pesticides on bee populations. Without the UK’s reputation for upholding its word and ability to act internationally to address regional or global problems, any Government action to confront these challenges would remain partial or ineffective.http://www.dominicgrieve.org.uk/news/britain-and-international-rule-law
A pause for thought:https://twitter.com/afneil/status/715485327477972993
Quote:China has produced more steel in past two years than UK has managed cumulatively since industrial revolution in 19th century.If true, that's quite a thought. Isn't it also a wonderful hing that we can produce so much steel?
Oh, go on, even football will be effected: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35919247
Quote:British football could be radically changed if the UK votes to leave the European Union, according to experts and leading voices in the game.Some fear so-called Brexit could lead to more than 400 players losing the right to play in the UK, while others say it may give home talent a chance.It's clear that from a free market point of view leaving will mean missing out on a lot of top talent, and will shrink the labour market for footballers (lets not forget, a lot of those EU passport holders are French Africans).
There are 130,000 members of British Steel pension scheme, sponsored by Tata & with £485m hole. This steel crisis is about more than jobs
— Robert Peston (@Peston) March 31, 2016
Quote:There are 130,000 members of British Steel pension scheme, sponsored by Tata & with £485m hole. This steel crisis is about more than jobsThat is significant, what's coming down the line is a withdrawl of investments made by that steel pension coupled with a fall in demand as those steel workers move into lower paying jobs (as Paul Mason notes, re-skilling=de-skilling when talking abo9ut steel workers):https://medium.com/mosquito-ridge/steel-crisis-they-do-not-give-a-shit-86516750a1e0#.btnv3akcu
Quote:“There, there, let’s re-skill them”, they will say; “and let’s exempt them, for a while, from coercive bullying at the job centres”. It is just cant.The skill levels of this industry are so high; the ratio of capital to labour so high; that nine times out of ten “re-skilling” means simply de-skilling.Oh, and before we join the nationalists in the Labour party, this is hurting our fellow workers in China:http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/feb/29/china-to-cut-jobs-in-coal-and-steel-sectors
Quote:China expects to lay off 1.8 million workers in the coal and steel industries, or about 15% of the workforce, as part of efforts to reduce industrial overcapacity.It was the first time China gave figures that underlining the magnitude of its task in dealing with slowing growth and bloated state enterprises.Yin Weimin, the minister for human resources and social security, told a news conference on Monday that 1.3 million workers in the coal sector could lose their jobs, plus 500,000 from the steel sector.Finally, it is interesting that jeremy Corbyn has put his name to a petition:https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/126128(If you go to the Map, you'll it has been chiefly signed in South Wales, but it has surged well past 100K signatures, it will get debated). This is his populist touch in action.
https://theconversation.com/what-leaving-the-eu-would-really-mean-for-british-trade-deals-56756
Quote:Could the UK opt-out and go it alone? In theory, yes, but in practice, the picture would be rather different. There are three major obstacles in concluding post-Brexit deals.The first is that much would depend on what the UK’s relationship with the EU would look like after Brexit. That would take time to resolve but would probably take priority given the UK’s current reliance on the single market. If the UK concludes an agreement to retain access to the single market, like Norway and Switzerland, it would be difficult for it to have separate deals with non-EU member states, as they may conflict. And while the UK might be able to continue to take advantage of existing EU agreements with other countries, it would not have a say in any changes or negotiations over new agreements – for example, with China.The second is the process, both in terms of the content and the time needed. Trade agreements are complex and take time.[…]To take an example, the Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement took 14 rounds of negotiation over nine years to conclude. And as one Eurosceptic MP – who is nevertheless going to vote to remain in – recognises, markets are more global and sophisticated than they ever were, adding to this complexity.If they are measuring productivity per global hours worked, that does have knock ons for things like benefits and pensions, the pension issue is only significant if the rate of growth of the dependency ratio is higher than the rate of growth of productivity, for example. The chief issue is that social democracy has relied on economic growth and gowing productivity to make welfare capitalis happen, if growth and productivity growth remain schlerotic that means (to borrow an Irish phrase) the Fiscal Space starts to disappear. If small crumbs from a bigger cake aren't available then we have to redistribute the cake.
It is staggering how blatant the Tories have been, their cuts to Personal Living Allowance have directly paid for a swathe of tax cuts. they'll say raising the tax threashold to £11K will help poor workers, but at the expense of workers unable to find jobs, and of course, millionaires get that element of eprsonal tax allowance as well. This is the foullest redistribution of poverty imaginable, taking from the most vulnerable to give to the ones doing best out of the wages system.
And the great trick is, it's a bit like Bully's Star prize: here's what you could have won. What we lose isn't something taken from us, it potential wealth we should have had, we are made poorer invisibly. Imagine how much better off we'd all be if the ratios above we 50/50 (i.e. inquality was static).
Juan Cole has a similar resume of 5 years on:http://www.juancole.com/2016/03/winners-and-losers-in-5-years-of-syrian-civil-war.html
http://www.leedsbuildingsociety.co.uk/_resources/pdfs/press-pdfs/financial-resulsts-pdfs/reports-accounts-2015.pdfThis building society annual report makes interesting reading:"Bank Base Rate has remained at 0.5% for the last seven years and we don’t currently anticipateany rise until 2017. This, combined with increased competition in the mortgage market, meansborrowers have seen even greater benefit in this historically low rate environment.""We’ve already experienced increased competition, particularly in the mortgage market, in the second half of 2015 and we anticipate this will only intensify. Therefore, we expect to see some downward pressure on our net interestmargin as we move through 2016 and into 2017""Savings balances grew by £751m to £9.9bn, the highest level in our history""Our ability to pay above market returns to attract and retain savers has enabled us to help a recordnumber of borrowers in 2015"So, basically, money remains plentiful and in fact savings are increasing, leading to more competition in the borrowing market.Also, note their business model: "The Society borrows from Savers" "Net interest margin(Secure)The difference between interest received on assets and interest paid on liabilities, measured as a percentage of mean assets. This is the Society’s main source of income." 1.62%, quite a margin, but they do have to pay for 1,300 staff. That is £207 million, off about £13 billion of assets.
jondwhite wrote:Also what would be the main differences with so-called 'democratic centralism' in terms of accountability?Well, several layers. In DC conference delegates elect a central committee (on a slate, that is for or against the entire comittee, not a vote for individual members, this slate is normally put forward by the outgoing committee). The central committee can put motions to conference as well (our EC may not)."Subject to the sovereignty of Conference, decisions taken by the Central Committee (CC), National Committee (NC) and Party Council are binding on caucuses, districts and branches, and individual party members." Oh, and this beautiful line:"B r a n c h e s a n d / o r d i s t r i c t s e l e ct delegates to Conference on a basis proportional to their membership, as determined by the Central Committee."http://socialistunity.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/IB1sept2013.pdfThe CC appoints the full-time organisers.So:1) Our principle officers are directly elected (Gen Sec, treasurer, organiser)2) Our EC is directly elected3) All EC can only appoint people to a committee on the nomination of a branch4) So there is at most one layer between members and functionaries of the party.
northern light wrote:Young Master Smeet, there is/was no need to write to the IC asking how to start up a branch twitter account. We already have one, managed by our branch secretary. Two branch members were due to be elected to hold the password and monitor the account, but recent events have distracted branch activity, somewhatOf course you already knew that the branch had a twitter account. You took part in the conversation on Spintcom. You even posted,"Grand and there you go, a win for democracy and co-operation." Then Matt moved the goal posts and frustrated Vin.As far as your second suggestion is concerned, the NERB already have a social media co-ordinator. It is comrade Maratty. He was appointed, Internet and Social Media Officer at our July 2015 meeting.There is clearly some problem of liaison between the branch and the IC, and askign the IC what they want from branches in terms of a social media set-up would not hurt, and may clarify matters.I suggested the IC get a scial media co-ordination role, not NERB.
Tim Kilgallon wrote:This is the difficulty, YMS, Vin did exactly as you suggest and despite informing the IC of his actions, the IC appear to have reported that an unknown operator was using the account that Vin set up.I think the way forward may be for the branch to write to the IC, asking their advice on how to start up a branch twitter account. Whatver confusion has occurred could be avoided in that way (and maybe the IC could designate one member as a social media co-ordinator, so we all have a named individual to contact?).
If there are no meetings, there are no minutes, usually it'll be the decision of one member, and the agreement (usually express or sometimes on minor matters by silence). So, say, for moderation of the fora, a Moderator will take a personal decision, and it will stand, if any member of the committee calls it in it gets discussed, or they might all send an email concurring, if they can't agree, they write to the EC.Lets take another example. A branch wants to hold a meeeting, on, say, William Morris, and writes to the library committee asking for a copy of Well at Worlds end. A member of the library committee writes back, saying, no, the book is in too shabby a state to travel or be posted. Should there be minutes for that? A branch's democratic activity is being curtailed.The question is, do we want a stultifying bureaucracy where nothing happens unless we get three physical people into a room, whose primary task is writing minutes?Democracy is not just nose counting. The activity of the party is carried out by its members, and they are accountabkle through a whole range of structures.1) Informal discusson2) Resolution of a branch3) resolution to the EC4) Resolution of the EC5) Branch poll6) Floor resolution at ADM7)Floor resolution at cofnerence8) Instructed resolution to conference9) Party pollSo far, we're at 1.
