Guided Missile

You've got the City & Guilds, pal. Find a Wilbur Ross quote about Brexit, AFTER Trump won the election and he was given his orders, although you probably think he make the final decisions rather than the elected politicians like Paul Ryan voting for them in Congress and the Senate, where republicans like Ryan hold a majority. Face it pal, you're on the run and getting more embarrassing each time you troll....

Professor Minford, a one-time adviser to Margaret Thatcher who has become one of the most prominent economists in the Brexit camp, focuses with particular zeal on the inaccuracy of the pro-EU side’s predictions that a vote to leave would hammer confidence. Such pessimistic views were once widespread, but last week Andy Haldane, the Bank of England’s chief economist, admitted that his own prophecies of an immediate post-vote downturn were misjudged.For Prof Minford, the failure of his opponents’ forecasts is vital in the fight over how the UK leaves the EU and what sort of relationship it builds in future with the bloc.“They are hoping slower growth will turn public opinion against Brexit,” he said. “If these guys were right, we’d be seeing it by now.” In the run-up to the referendum, economics was the Remain campaign’s favoured weapon. As Leavers appealed to British hearts with the promise of regaining sovereignty and “taking back control”, chancellor George Osborne and others countered with warnings on the hit to growth and public finances. Detractors dubbed this “project fear” — although they worried themselves about an immediate hit to confidence in the wake of a vote to leave. Even Prof Minford himself expected growth to turn slightly negative at the end of last year But there has been no shock to the economy since the June referendum. Bolstered by unexpectedly strong consumer spending, Britain is now on track for roughly 2 per cent growth in 2016. Game, set and match to the Brexiteers

Donald Trump ally backs free trade deal with Britain to show America's 'solidarity with our indispensable ally' - The Daily Telegraph GOP Speaker of the House Paul Ryan CREDIT: AP PHOTO/J. SCOTT APPLEWHITE, FILE Ben Riley-Smith, assistant political editor 26 NOVEMBER 2016 • 12:59PM:

The story so far: I am sure I've missed a few more pearls of wisdom from our resident political and economic experts...

Like I said over a week ago:

Natural gas plays a key role in our nation's clean energy future. The U.S. has vast reserves of natural gas that are commercially viable as a result of advances in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing technologies enabling greater access to gas in shale formations. Responsible development of America's shale gas resources offers important economic, energy security, and environmental benefits. EPA is working with states and other key stakeholders to help ensure that natural gas extraction does not come at the expense of public health and the environment. The Agency's focus and obligations under the law are to provide oversight, guidance and, where appropriate, rulemaking that achieve the best possible protections for the air, water and land where Americans live, work and play. The Agency is investing in improving our scientific understanding of hydraulic fracturing, providing regulatory clarity with respect to existing laws, and using existing authorities where appropriate to enhance health and environmental safeguards.

Every time you take a sh !t can impact drinking water. That's why we have water treatment plants that prevent the bacterial contamination that is by far the greatest health threat. The biggest polluters of our water resources? Try Thames Water and the rest of the private water companies....

The EPA have no problems with the technology. Still, I guess people with your outlook have been around for a while:

I think £987,577 net profit on sales of £4,055,993 for our last accounting period is not too shabby. A lot of people make more than that in a year, but I'm taking a wild guess that a jealous stalker like you, isn't one of them. Anyway, WTF would I want to sell up with returns like that and given the opportunities Brexit will offer us and the many staff we have hired, since receiving the modest research grants, I'd be a fool to consider it.

Hilarious... Tim, learn to read, mate. It normally works better than making sh !t up. Anyway, it looks like things are warming up in Oz for us and our UK product, developed and manufactured in Hampshire by a Saints fan. By the time your reading skills have improved, it'll be in the papers and I'll be even richer...

Fracking a mile under my house? I think I would be able to sleep at night, particularly knowing I might be paying less to heat the place. And fracking dangerous to the environment? Give us a break. I bet you and the other lefties were at the front of the demonstrations against pit closures.

What sites, you clown...?

Total b0ll0x as usual. An article from today's Times here. I love when you post Tim. It's like shooting fish in a barrel.

Cheers! That's the spirit!

So, while the clueless Remainer keyboard warriors continue to spout rubbish about the perceived negative impact of Brexit on our international trade, I think it may be worth me providing the real life benefits of the vote to leave. The major reason that I voted to leave was that technology I have developed, was being strangled at birth by the EU, very much like that which prevented the benefits of GM crops and fracking from being introduced into the EU, to help provide the UK with cheap food and energy. Specifically, the member state spearheading the banning of a product utilising our technology was Germany. The German government regulator that was obstructing the introduction of this technology, wrote to me demanding to know if I had a supply agreement with Bayer (a massive German corporation) for the major active ingredients we were using in our product. It was/is apparent that this type of state interference in commercial arrangements is all part of the national protectionism in Germany and France. Anyone with any experience of doing business in the EU, understands the way the major EU corporations can use the myriad of EU regulations to their advantage and lobby the politicians/government to help in this objective. No surprise that politicians and big business liked the EU status quo. Consequently the product was banned in the EU, one that had sales potential for up to £125 million in the EU alone. No wonder the Germans didn't want it to succeed. The Chinese National Chemical Corporation, i.e. the Chinese government are suing the EU over the ban. The story might appear to be another sob story from a frustrated UK S.M.E. fighting to get UK technology introduced into the EU. It may not turn out too bad for us, after all. Foreseeing the way things were going in the EU and after an approach by a major Australian corporation, we provided access to the technology to them, in the hope that the product could be introduced in this area. Yesterday, I received an email from the company, stating that the product has been approved for sale in New Zealand and they expect approval in Australia soon. To quote our new partner: So, needless to say I am flying out to Oz to negotiate a deal and it doesn't really depend any free trade agreement the UK may or may not have with Australia. Like it or not, countries like Australia are our real friends. Germany and France are not. Screw 'em....

What I would like to know is that if an EU member state opted out of the Schengen Agreement, it is thus restricting the free-movement of people, yet is still a member of the single market. EU states that opted out are Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Ireland, Romania and the United Kingdom. Of course the UK will be able to be part of the single market yet opt out of the free movement of people. That, in practice, is what is happening at the moment and even countries which are part of the Schengen Agreement, such as Denmark, Sweden and even Germany have introduced border controls. The principle of the freedom of movement within the EU is a dead duck, let's face it....

This admission is not a minor issue, in my opinion. It is the BoE that has informed the British Government and, disgracefully, the British people, on the "consequences" of voting leave. Mark Carney should resign and return to Canada where he can spend time realising that economics and political forecasts are not sciences. More like opinion, rhetoric and gambling. Thank God the British public saw through these overpaid jokers. They didn't see the 2008 crash happening and they completely overplayed their hand over Brexit. Brexit will be what the British people will make of it and I have every confidence we will be just fine. To quote a great politician, "Who do you think you are kidding, Mr. Junker?"

More bad news for the Remainers here.

I think that "honourable" mentions should go to other members of the gang: Maurice the Mallet (I kid you not) "Killer" Calloway Bootsie "Jimmer" Marshall If I mention any more, it may give the impression that I was part of this group and used to run the away fans back to the station after the game, so I will leave the list at that...

What an ignorant lot the British electorate are. A pity more people don't have your intelligence and insight, with which you have made millions, obviously.

And the flip side, here. and here.

Can I take this opportunity to wish all my fellow posters and Saints fans on this forum a Happy Xmas and a prosperous and peaceful New Year. I am sure that, outside of an anonymous internet environment and preferably inside a football stadium, supporting our club, we would all get on famously. All those I have disagreed with, sorry for this, but thank you for the lively discussions. To those who are unfortunate enough to be spending Xmas away from God's country, here in Southampton, wherever you are, I wish you all well and hope you are able to visit St. Mary's soon! Finally, I would like to thank Steve Grant and his fellow mods, for all their efforts in maintaining this forum as the best place to follow Saints. It has improved year on year and provides fans locally and far away, a vital link to our club. Peace to all....

Article 24/3 of the TEU (Treaty of the European Union) states: Yeah, right, neutral member states....read the above and try and understand the fundamental reason the PM of Finland clearly understood why they are no longer "neutral" along with the other bunch of free loaders hiding behind NATO's shield. Putin also understands this and is why, during Trump's campaign he referred to nuclear proliferation as the "single biggest problem" facing the world, but also said he could not rule out using nuclear weapons against Europe. Thank God we are out of the EU. Meddling bunch of clueless unelected bureaucrats....

As part of the EU, Ireland, Sweden, Austria and Finland are not neutral. This view was supported by the Finnish Prime Minister, Matti Vanhanen, on 5 July 2006, while speaking to the European Parliament as Council President; As far as the military capability of the EU, there are, in my opinion, only two countries with armies capable of standing up to Russia's military might, namely the UK and France. One of those is leaving the EU and both would require the assistance of the US anyway. I can't see the Trump administration through NATO getting too involved the next time the EU meddles in Russian interests again, given the contribution the EU makes to NATO: According to NATO statistics, the U.S. spent an estimated $650 billion on defense last year. That's more than double the amount all the other 27 NATO countries spent between them, even though their combined GDP tops that of the U.S., so I don't blame Trump preferring to talk to Putin. I can't see the French or Germans being much help.