[Politics] Brexit

Herr Tubthumper said:

I wonder what all the Little Englanders will think of a bridge connecting Britain to mainland Europe?

Click to expand...

pastafarian said:

One day you will quote the extended paragraphs from that article in full to give full context as why he sees it as something that could be positive, and not just cherry pick "mostly eliminate British manufacturing", Even better why not quote the full article.
Oh wait, no you wont, that’s not in your weasel mis-representing handbook.

Click to expand...

pastafarian said:

I am surprised so many of you remainers have stopped drinking chlorinated tap water.
Must be nice all that spring water........but not very environmentally friendly of you all

Click to expand...

pastafarian said:

I like bridges.
Bet Merkel wished there had been a bridge between Turkey and Greece, she wouldnt have had to drown so many migrants to up her workforce

Click to expand...

Lincoln Imp said:

I don't think I'm misrepresenting the 'weasel' at all, although hugely-discredited wacko might be a better description. Still, if you want me to mention the positive aspects of destroying British industry then I'm happy to pass on his claim that it will result in £135 billion making its way into the country. Meanwhile, you might care to ask the 50-odd Brexit-supporting Americans you are apparently in touch with what they would think of a scheme to bring in cheap foreign goods from the other end of the world whilst simultaneously turning whole communities at home into rust belts. They have strong feelings about this sort of thing I believe.

Click to expand...

Baldseagull said:

It isn't so much that the chicken is washed in chlorine, it's that it needs to be washed in chlorine, because their processing allows the carcasses to become contaminated.

Click to expand...

Baldseagull said:

That is a bit sick mate. Not your finest moment.

Click to expand...

pastafarian said:

You can keep your German pseudo scare science, thanks.

“European opposition to imports of chlorinated chicken has been spearheaded by Germany, where the products are subjected to ridicule, often based on an unscientific apprehension. Angela Merkel, the country’s Chancellor, has declared that there is “no question” they will accept US poultry treated with chemical rinses into Germany. Yet German perceptions of food safety standards appear to be warped by a prodomestic bias. Both US and German consumers believe that their own set of food regulations are superior.”

“The phenomenon is not unlike foreign attitudes to British beef products in the wake of the BSE scare of the 1990s. International consumers have remained wary, long after the crisis has passed. Tellingly, the EU’s own scientists have sided with the US, in agreeing that PRTs are safe.”

“immersing poultry meat in chlorine dioxide solution of the strength used in the United States reduces prevalence of salmonella from 14% in controls to 2%. EU chicken samples typically have 15-20% salmonella.”

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...d01a494/1500804930480/Chlorinated+Chicken.pdf
https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/buying-...at-their-poultry-with-chlorine/555618.article




Truth hurts.
Did you lend tacit support to her policy? Yes? I would feel guilty about the drownings as well if i had been one of those that did. But as a German lady said to the reporter as the migrants arrived at the train station "the deaths were a price worth paying".......sick i know.......some people eh,warped beyond reasoning.

Click to expand...

pastafarian said:

I like bridges.
Bet Merkel wished there had been a bridge between Turkey and Greece,

Click to expand...

Yoda said:

As far as I'm concerned, they can both keep their own. Remember, in the UK chickens are vaccinated against it and salmonella has been virtually eliminated now. Whereas in the US it counts for over 1 million illnesses each year.

Click to expand...

Yoda said:

Why does there need to be a bridge? There's a ****ing land border. Geography obviously not your strong point.

Click to expand...

The Clamp said:

Click to expand...

pastafarian said:

You can keep your German pseudo scare science, thanks.

“European opposition to imports of chlorinated chicken has been spearheaded by Germany, where the products are subjected to ridicule, often based on an unscientific apprehension. Angela Merkel, the country’s Chancellor, has declared that there is “no question” they will accept US poultry treated with chemical rinses into Germany. Yet German perceptions of food safety standards appear to be warped by a prodomestic bias. Both US and German consumers believe that their own set of food regulations are superior.”

“The phenomenon is not unlike foreign attitudes to British beef products in the wake of the BSE scare of the 1990s. International consumers have remained wary, long after the crisis has passed. Tellingly, the EU’s own scientists have sided with the US, in agreeing that PRTs are safe.”

“immersing poultry meat in chlorine dioxide solution of the strength used in the United States reduces prevalence of salmonella from 14% in controls to 2%. EU chicken samples typically have 15-20% salmonella.”

https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...d01a494/1500804930480/Chlorinated+Chicken.pdf
https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/buying-...at-their-poultry-with-chlorine/555618.article




Truth hurts

Click to expand...

Yoda said:

Why does there need to be a bridge? There's a ****ing land border. Geography obviously not your strong point.

Click to expand...

Titanic said:

400 days to go.

Click to expand...

Herr Tubthumper said:

I’m willing to listen to anything. But, the article states there is no science. And subtly adds the often caveat. So, there is science. Then suggests Germans, incorrectly, believe their standards are better.....without giving any reasons as to how this idea came about. Vague article with no hard facts.

Try again.

Click to expand...

Greg Clark, the business secretary, is working frantically to prevent Unilever choosing the Netherlands over the UK for its new headquarters

The giant consumer group, whose products range from Dove soap to Marmite, will decide within the next three weeks if its new base will be in Rotterdam or London.

Mr Clark and Alex Chisholm, the permanent secretary in his department, have held a series of talks with Unilever. Mr Clark has met them “a lot of times”, according to a government source. The two men have expressed optimism about the outcome of the discussions, emphasising that Unilever has not made a final decision.

Unilever pledged to review its dual legal structure and stock market listing in the UK and the Netherlands last year after a surprise £115 billion takeover approach by Kraft Heinz. The bid was ultimately unsuccessful but it rattled Unilever as it highlighted that, while the company’s long-term sustainable investment model generated growth, it was not doing it fast enough. Reviewing its dual structure was one of a number of measures announced by Unilever in its efforts to “unlock value” and meet a 20 per cent operating margin target.

The company has been listed both in London and in the Netherlands since the British soapmaker Lever Brothers merged with Margarine Unie, a Dutch spread maker, in 1930. The dual structure means it has two boards with the same members, two sets of corporate laws and two sets of shareholders. It has to prepare accounts in euros and pounds and hold two annual meetings. Its shares trade in London and Amsterdam as well as through American depositary receipts in the US.

Having a headquarters in only one legal and tax jurisdiction will not only simplify Unilever’s complex business but, crucially, provide it with a single stock market quote, making it much easier to issue new shares or carry out share-based acquisitions.

Paul Polman, the Dutch chief executive, said at the time the review was announced that changing the structure could make the company more nimble for large acquisitions. If Unilever, which employs 7,500 people in the UK, chooses the Netherlands it would still keep a secondary stock market listing in London but it would count as a significant corporate defeat for Brexit Britain.

The Netherlands has been lobbying hard for Unilever to pick a Dutch base. Mark Rutte, the Dutch prime minister, used to work at Unilever and has made a number of recent rulings that favour international investors in Dutch companies.

Unilever will make a final decision at a board meeting to be held in the second week of March. There are a number of options available, and it is possible that Unilever could move its headquarters to Rotterdam but still opt to keep its primary listing in London.

Unilever declined to comment on the matter yesterday.

Click to expand...

titanic said:

400 days to go.

Click to expand...

pastafarian said:

Without giving reasons?......you wally.
Read it again, take note of all the notations and links to other citations
Cant believe you didnt see them

none so blind etc etc etc

Click to expand...