You don't know that. The evidence so far suggests otherwise.
It is expected that EU companies now Head Quartered in England, will be moving to an EU country.
Why would they do that? UK will offer them good incentives and they most probably will stay with cheers. At least UK will not be prosecuted for "illegal state aid" like Ireland...
Apple may even save Ireland from the "Eurodoom" by quitting Ireland and moving to UK ;-)
Maybe it's because Germany is highly industrialized.
That's been the case for a very long time; long enough to be a factor in the attractiveness of the country.
However, policies to allow in refugees from worn-torn Islamic states have only recently ramped up the numbers
of radicalized Muslims in the EU, and so this factor has not had time to tear down the best-country rankings.
Give it time.
Germany is a very controlled cautious country. For example the minimum down payment on a house is 20%.
For years they have been leading the car industry, until recently VW was caught cheating on exhaust pollution.
Regarding the falsified numbers from VW, apparently this was common from all diesel vehicle manufacturers because the mileage requirements in the US were impossible to hit. Wasn't only the Germans who faked the data. Even Japanese and US companies did it.
Switzerland has the fourth highest gun ownership rate in the world and enforces strict immigration limits.
What has gun ownership got to do with anything?
You've never been very astute at following the logic of your own arguments, have you?
I wrote: "Switzerland seems to be doing OK outside the EU quagmire."
You responded: "And don't have any border controls with the EU..."
Gun ownership keeps the threat of radical Islamists at bay in Switzerland, whereas the unarmed population in Britain have been victims for years. Bombs, guns, machetes... Brits should arm themselves because their borders will still remain porous to EU interlopers.
You've never been very astute at following the logic of your own arguments, have you?
I wrote: "Switzerland seems to be doing OK outside the EU quagmire."
You responded: "And don't have any border controls with the EU..."
Gun ownership keeps the threat of radical Islamists at bay in Switzerland, whereas the unarmed population in Britain have been victims for years. Bombs, guns, machetes... Brits should arm themselves because their borders will still remain porous to EU interlopers.
You cannot stop trained terrorists with "gun ownership". Don't even try, you did not get anti-terror training.
You've never been very astute at following the logic of your own arguments, have you?
I wrote: "Switzerland seems to be doing OK outside the EU quagmire."
You responded: "And don't have any border controls with the EU..."
Gun ownership keeps the threat of radical Islamists at bay in Switzerland, whereas the unarmed population in Britain have been victims for years. Bombs, guns, machetes... Brits should arm themselves because their borders will still remain porous to EU interlopers.
What nonsense. Switzerland is notoriously neutral in international affairs, Britain is an active participant in western intervention in the Middle East. That's why it's a target for radical Islamists. Who actually have not used guns in any terror attack that I can recall.
Incidentally it's not that hard to get hold of a shotgun in the UK. But I'm sure you knew that; you seem to have done so much research.
Britain is an active participant in western intervention in the Middle East. That's why it's a target for radical Islamists.
O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil). (Sura 9, verse 123)
And KILL them (the unbelievers) wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers. (Sura 2, verse 191)
I rather think that has something to do with it. It wasn’t George W. Bush’s policies that caused the invasion of Al Andalus, after all.
I keep hearing criticism of Leave for not having a plan, but it wasn't their responsibility to put forward a plan, just an argument to vote Leave. It was a cross party campaign so even if they did have a plan they wouldn't have had any authority to implement it, it would have been down to the Prime Minister and his government to implement any plan.
The blame for a lack of a plan and the political vacuum we're now in can be placed squarely at Cameron's feet. He (and probably Osborne as well) shouldn't have taken a side in this campaign (which is what Harold Wilson did in the 1975 referendum) and had a plan for whatever the result was which could have been put into action immediately last Friday. Instead he put his lot in with one side and now his side has lost he's left himself with no authority.
What strikes me is HOW THE F*** can proexit camp talk about a vote in this matter if you don't present your _PLAN_ and the consequences and how you need to deal with them. This is plainly about feelings and the subject has nothing to do with logic. If the leave vote was anchored in logic it would reflect exactly HOW things would have to be and would reflect the real world scenario in a realistic manner. The risks would be discussed and there would be a plan to deal with this. But now the exit voters have forced the 48% (or more remember that only some 7x% voted) of the people of Britain to deal with all the risks and if you haven't thought of them before the vote would maybe have been a little different than it was now.
Its like observing a kid who says: "I wont brush my teeth because I don't like it", just to be angry at himself later for having 9 holes in his teeth later and his moral hangover about the fact that it was his own choice and he now needs to have massive drilling.
I keep hearing criticism of Leave for not having a plan, but it wasn't their responsibility to put forward a plan, just an argument to vote Leave. It was a cross party campaign so even if they did have a plan they wouldn't have had any authority to implement it, it would have been down to the Prime Minister and his government to implement any plan.
The blame for a lack of a plan and the political vacuum we're now in can be placed squarely at Cameron's feet. He (and probably Osborne as well) shouldn't have taken a side in this campaign (which is what Harold Wilson did in the 1975 referendum) and had a plan for whatever the result was which could have been put into action immediately last Friday. Instead he put his lot in with one side and now his side has lost he's left himself with no authority.
What strikes me is HOW THE F*** can proexit camp talk about a vote in this matter if you don't present your _PLAN_ and the consequences and how you need to deal with them. This is plainly about feelings and the subject has nothing to do with logic. If the leave vote was anchored in logic it would reflect exactly HOW things would have to be and would reflect the real world scenario in a realistic manner. The risks would be discussed and there would be a plan to deal with this. But now the exit voters have forced the 48% (or more remember that only some 7x% voted) of the people of Britain to deal with all the risks and if you haven't thought of them before the vote would maybe have been a little different than it was now.
Its like observing a kid who says: "I wont brush my teeth because I don't like it", just to be angry at himself later for having 9 holes in his teeth later and his moral hangover about the fact that it was his own choice and he now needs to have massive drilling.
Dominic Cummings, the director of the Leave campaign proposed a second referendum to be held before the invocation of article 50, to vote on the plan. Other "leaders" in Leave dismissed that idea. They're dead set against a second referendum, as there's a significant chance they'd lose, especially now that they're backtracking on pretty much every claim they made during the campaign.
I keep hearing criticism of Leave for not having a plan, but it wasn't their responsibility to put forward a plan, just an argument to vote Leave. It was a cross party campaign so even if they did have a plan they wouldn't have had any authority to implement it, it would have been down to the Prime Minister and his government to implement any plan.
The blame for a lack of a plan and the political vacuum we're now in can be placed squarely at Cameron's feet. He (and probably Osborne as well) shouldn't have taken a side in this campaign (which is what Harold Wilson did in the 1975 referendum) and had a plan for whatever the result was which could have been put into action immediately last Friday. Instead he put his lot in with one side and now his side has lost he's left himself with no authority.
What strikes me is HOW THE F*** can proexit camp talk about a vote in this matter if you don't present your _PLAN_ and the consequences and how you need to deal with them. This is plainly about feelings and the subject has nothing to do with logic. If the leave vote was anchored in logic it would reflect exactly HOW things would have to be and would reflect the real world scenario in a realistic manner. The risks would be discussed and there would be a plan to deal with this. But now the exit voters have forced the 48% (or more remember that only some 7x% voted) of the people of Britain to deal with all the risks and if you haven't thought of them before the vote would maybe have been a little different than it was now.
Its like observing a kid who says: "I wont brush my teeth because I don't like it", just to be angry at himself later for having 9 holes in his teeth later and his moral hangover about the fact that it was his own choice and he now needs to have massive drilling.
You act like national sovereignty is some kind of fucking mystery.
A return to sovereignty is never a mistake. What assbackwards you people are.
Plenty of nations have been granted independence and are now in the doldrums compared to where they were. Sovereignty itself is worthless without a plan to make something of it. As it currently stands it seems the UK will either out of necessity make a deal with the EU where we have near enough the exact same border policy, bureaucracy, and contribution, but no veto or presence in its governance, or the UK will be penalised by the common market, and probably suffer a major economic slump, potentially lasting a long time, in addition to a constitutional crisis that may lead to the break-up of the UK. Neither is certain, and couldn't possibly be, because there is no plan.
Plenty of nations have been granted independence and are now in the doldrums compared to where they were.
Aw, do we really have to have THAT discussion now, because you and your group are already so deluded (though can’t ever seem to come back with anything other than ‘my feelings are hurt’) that you certainly couldn’t handle it...
Sovereignty itself is worthless without a plan to make something of it.
And whose fault is that, exactly? I wonder if you know what the phrase ‘in principle’ means.
But yay sovereignty!
Your grandchildren will spit on your grave and be ashamed for being associated with the memory of your beliefs. That’s fine, though; their future will be so much better that it will hardly matter.
Aw, do we really have to have THAT discussion now, because you and your group are already so deluded (though can’t ever seem to come back with anything other than ‘my feelings are hurt’) that you certainly couldn’t handle it...
Hello straw man and putting words in other people's mouths. Do we really have to have THIS discussion again? Bad form, as always.
I'm not even sure what discussion you're referring to, so maybe we could try having it, instead of you being a pompous ass before we've even started?
And whose fault is that, exactly? I wonder if you know what the phrase ‘in principle’ means.
Whose fault? Bit of a mixed bag really. I'd say David Cameron for calling for the simple referendum in the first place putting internal party politics ahead of the nation, then the leave campaign for not putting forward a plan, and also the people who voted leave for not demanding a plan.
Your grandchildren will spit on your grave and be ashamed for being associated with the memory of your beliefs. That’s fine, though; their future will be so much better that it will hardly matter.
My grandchildren are never going to exist, so your crystal ball is flawed at even simple operations. I don't put much, or any, faith in it for anything else either.
When is the collapse coming again? And where are Donald Trumps tax returns?
You got the gist of it; not enacting a plan (at any stage) for the reorganization of sovereign territory is the fault of the people who got sovereignty.
India did fine, though, for example, so I imagine Britain will do even better.
My grandchildren are never going to exist
And yet you think that your ideologies will survive! How fucking insane is that? I’d say that you’re starting to lose it, but it has been lost since the beginning.
You got the gist of it; not enacting a plan (at any stage) for the reorganization of sovereign territory is the fault of the people who got sovereignty.
India did fine, though, for example, so I imagine Britain will do even better. And yet you think that your ideologies will survive! How fucking insane is that? I’d say that you’re starting to lose it, but it has been lost since the beginning.
So you agree with me when I say that sovereignty is worthless in itself without a plan to make something of it? Why did you even reply to me with your insults then? Why do you do this?
P.S. You don't know the first thing about my ideologies sweetie, we've been through this before. All you do is guess, presume, and indulge your own indignation.
Comments
Apple may even save Ireland from the "Eurodoom" by quitting Ireland and moving to UK ;-)
I wrote: "Switzerland seems to be doing OK outside the EU quagmire."
You responded: "And don't have any border controls with the EU..."
Gun ownership keeps the threat of radical Islamists at bay in Switzerland, whereas the unarmed population in Britain have been victims for years. Bombs, guns, machetes... Brits should arm themselves because their borders will still remain porous to EU interlopers.
Incidentally it's not that hard to get hold of a shotgun in the UK. But I'm sure you knew that; you seem to have done so much research.
And KILL them (the unbelievers) wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers. (Sura 2, verse 191)
I rather think that has something to do with it. It wasn’t George W. Bush’s policies that caused the invasion of Al Andalus, after all.
Its like observing a kid who says: "I wont brush my teeth because I don't like it", just to be angry at himself later for having 9 holes in his teeth later and his moral hangover about the fact that it was his own choice and he now needs to have massive drilling.
But yay sovereignty!
And whose fault is that, exactly? I wonder if you know what the phrase ‘in principle’ means.
Your grandchildren will spit on your grave and be ashamed for being associated with the memory of your beliefs. That’s fine, though; their future will be so much better that it will hardly matter.
I'm not even sure what discussion you're referring to, so maybe we could try having it, instead of you being a pompous ass before we've even started?
Whose fault? Bit of a mixed bag really. I'd say David Cameron for calling for the simple referendum in the first place putting internal party politics ahead of the nation, then the leave campaign for not putting forward a plan, and also the people who voted leave for not demanding a plan.
Have I missed anyone?
My grandchildren are never going to exist, so your crystal ball is flawed at even simple operations. I don't put much, or any, faith in it for anything else either.
When is the collapse coming again? And where are Donald Trumps tax returns?
India did fine, though, for example, so I imagine Britain will do even better.
And yet you think that your ideologies will survive! How fucking insane is that? I’d say that you’re starting to lose it, but it has been lost since the beginning.
P.S. You don't know the first thing about my ideologies sweetie, we've been through this before. All you do is guess, presume, and indulge your own indignation.