Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

The influence of the EU on Britain.

1257258260262263607

Comments

  • edited May 2018

    seth plum said:

    P.S.
    What is a clean brexit?

    What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.

    Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
    That sounds awfully like leaving without any agreement and seeking to then negotiate while trading on WTO terms.

    But then, most of those who have talked of a "clean Brexit" really seem to want the hardest possible break with the EU (often allied to a desire for the to become a deregulated unilateral free trade Minfordesque "paradise"), regardless of the consequences.

    I have a sneaking suspicion that that is unlikely to work well for a significant proportion of the population.

    But I'm probably being deliberately obtuse.

    As an aside, I am really not drooling over the clusterfuck that is the UK Government "policy" on Brexit.

    Frankly, I'm absolutely terrified at the vista that I feel is opening before me, where the 1997 Blairite anthem that "Things can only get better" will prove just the teensiest bit false.
    I remember bouncing up and down to that at half time at old trafford in our QF FA Cup defeat in 1994

    Schmeichel had been sent off just before half time. Heddy days
  • cabbles said:

    seth plum said:

    P.S.
    What is a clean brexit?

    What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.

    Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
    That sounds awfully like leaving without any agreement and seeking to then negotiate while trading on WTO terms.

    But then, most of those who have talked of a "clean Brexit" really seem to want the hardest possible break with the EU (often allied to a desire for the to become a deregulated unilateral free trade Minfordesque "paradise"), regardless of the consequences.

    I have a sneaking suspicion that that is unlikely to work well for a significant proportion of the population.

    But I'm probably being deliberately obtuse.

    As an aside, I am really not drooling over the clusterfuck that is the UK Government "policy" on Brexit.

    Frankly, I'm absolutely terrified at the vista that I feel is opening before me, where the 1997 Blairite anthem that "Things can only get better" will prove just the teensiest bit false.
    I remember bouncing up and down to that at half time at old trafford in our QF FA Cup defeat in 1994

    Schmeichel had been sent off just before half time. Heddy days
    Lasted for about a minute after the second half started.
  • seth plum said:

    I take Chippys lols as an expression of glee at the pissed offness of us brexit losers.
    As far as I am concerned he can freely continue to express his glee in this brief way.
    I shall continue to express my pissed offness, but at greater length with more developed arguments.

    It's pointless. As I said, he reacts that way to facts, putting more facts in front of any of them isn't going to help, they are too stupid to understand. I shall refrain from pointing this out from now on as it upsets them.
  • Anyway, here's a bloke whose business is going up the Swanee unless this shit storm is sorted. Have a chuckle at his life.

    https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/the-van-driver-being-put-out-of-business-by-brexit/
  • seth plum said:

    P.S.
    What is a clean brexit?

    This, apparently.

    Don't waste your money though. Pair of twats. I've crossed swords with Halligan a couple of time on Twitter, and funny enough not re Brexit in either case. Likes to dish it out but has some difficulty taking it. It's fun to remind him how he predicted that the oil price would return to $100 by the summer. The summer of 2016...He's got a bit of a soft spot for Russia, you see...

  • Vincenzo said:
    Oh God, its just so, so awful. Oh hang on, that is something else that has not actually happened. Never mind, if you wish hard enough bad things will happen.
  • Anyway, here's a bloke whose business is going up the Swanee unless this shit storm is sorted. Have a chuckle at his life.

    https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/the-van-driver-being-put-out-of-business-by-brexit/

    @nth london addick You should know what this bloke is talking about, right? Is he wrong or is he right?

    Or did you sell your business and start a hedge fund, without me knowing?

  • Sponsored links:


  • Southbank said:

    Vincenzo said:
    Oh God, its just so, so awful. Oh hang on, that is something else that has not actually happened. Never mind, if you wish hard enough bad things will happen.
    Nobody needs to wish for anything, but to simply have voted brexit.
  • Southbank said:

    Vincenzo said:
    Oh God, its just so, so awful. Oh hang on, that is something else that has not actually happened. Never mind, if you wish hard enough bad things will happen.
    Southbank said:

    Vincenzo said:
    Oh God, its just so, so awful. Oh hang on, that is something else that has not actually happened. Never mind, if you wish hard enough bad things will happen.
    Hasn't happened but will, the day we leave the customs union. If you read the pages above, there are many hits to our economy just from the vote to leave. Anyone but a Daily Mail headline writer must know we are headed for the cliff edge like lemmings, led by intellectuals like Boris and Rees-Mogg.
  • edited May 2018
    On a day when the boss of HMRC states that in his department's estimation of one version of May's future customs collection arrangements will cost up to £20b a year to operate, rather than report that, the Daily Mail has reached for it's George Soros dog whistle...

    image
  • On a day when the boss of HMRC states that in his department's estimation one version of May's future customs collection arrangements will cost up to £20b a year to operate, rather than report that the Daily Mail has reached for it's George Soros dog whistle...

    image

    £20B a year? I briefly saw the number quoted yesterday and assumed it was the total cost of setting up the infrastructure required for max fac rather than the annual cost - I assume that must basically take it off the table.

    That being said the whole concept of the Tories tearing themselves over whether to land on a Customs Partnership or max fac seems odd given that the EU is unlikely to agree to either.
  • se9addick said:

    On a day when the boss of HMRC states that in his department's estimation one version of May's future customs collection arrangements will cost up to £20b a year to operate, rather than report that the Daily Mail has reached for it's George Soros dog whistle...

    image

    £20B a year? I briefly saw the number quoted yesterday and assumed it was the total cost of setting up the infrastructure required for max fac rather than the annual cost - I assume that must basically take it off the table.

    That being said the whole concept of the Tories tearing themselves over whether to land on a Customs Partnership or max fac seems odd given that the EU is unlikely to agree to either.
    Yep. Costs to business (which will obviously be passed on) of between £17b - £20b annually.and would take years to implement.

    bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44229606

    I agree with you that should mean it's dead in the water but sadly I suspect it's not.
  • seth plum said:

    P.S.
    What is a clean brexit?

    What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.

    Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
    Funny, that's not what they are saying here. Can all you quitters please try and focus, and store this in your head to save yourselves from further embarrassment, so I don't have to keep trotting it out every time one of you chooses to forget a fact or two:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xGt3QmRSZY
  • So the EU is telling brexit UK that the UK can no longer be a part of the EU wide Galileo satellite system because after brexit the UK will be a foreign entity. When each individual voted brexit, because they knew what they were voting for, they anticipated that this exclusion would happen, and had alternative fully costed plans.
    Now the UK is lodging a strong objection to the exclusion it clearly voted for.
    The UK says it contravenes the phase one withdrawal deal signed in December.
    This is interesting because in that same December deal the UK signed up to included a fall back Irish border resolution with a border in the Irish sea, effectively leaving Northern Ireland in the EU.
    So if the UK insists Galileo cooperation is to happen, it may well be insisting on a break up of its own United Kingdom on the same deal signing basis.
    Brexiters knew all this anyway when they voted so they have it all in hand.
  • seth plum said:

    P.S.
    What is a clean brexit?

    What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.

    Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
    Funny, that's not what they are saying here. Can all you quitters please try and focus, and store this in your head to save yourselves from further embarrassment, so I don't have to keep trotting it out every time one of you chooses to forget a fact or two:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xGt3QmRSZY
    That's not what was on the ballot though, was it?
  • seth plum said:

    P.S.
    What is a clean brexit?

    What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.

    Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
    Funny, that's not what they are saying here. Can all you quitters please try and focus, and store this in your head to save yourselves from further embarrassment, so I don't have to keep trotting it out every time one of you chooses to forget a fact or two:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xGt3QmRSZY
    That's not what was on the ballot though, was it?
    No it wasn't. So you agree that the 37% of the electorate that voted Leave did not vote to leave the Single Market?
  • Sponsored links:


  • seth plum said:

    P.S.
    What is a clean brexit?

    What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.

    Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
    Funny, that's not what they are saying here. Can all you quitters please try and focus, and store this in your head to save yourselves from further embarrassment, so I don't have to keep trotting it out every time one of you chooses to forget a fact or two:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xGt3QmRSZY
    That's not what was on the ballot though, was it?
    So why were those chaps saying it then? Could they have been lying to get their own way? I think we should be told...
  • So a 'passionate remainer voter' is still a remainer-go figure.
    I was a passionate Leaver and still am, so what?
    My belief in democracy outweighs any possible short term economic loss. You guys who are willing to trade freedom for cash should go to China-they always put money first. Do you want to have to tell your children when they are older that you allowed concern for a small amount of money to overturn a mass democratic vote?
  • edited May 2018
    Southbank said:

    So a 'passionate remainer voter' is still a remainer-go figure.
    I was a passionate Leaver and still am, so what?
    My belief in democracy outweighs any possible short term economic loss. You guys who are willing to trade freedom for cash should go to China-they always put money first. Do you want to have to tell your children when they are older that you allowed concern for a small amount of money to overturn a mass democratic vote?
    I would believe you care about democracy if it were not for one thing. The only thing the British public voted for was to leave the EU. There are different ways to leave the EU. There has been a lot of rubbish talked about what this meant when nobody can know. When somebody says, I didn't vote for some form of customs union, well they can only speak for themselves not everybody who voted. I know a few Brexiters and they have very different outlooks.

    For those that are really interested in democracy, there are two interesting things. polls are showing in and outers are very close as they were in the vote. But there is a clear majority who seem to want to stay in the single market! I would say polls are the only way to gauge what the public's view is as the referendum didn't ask that question.

    Surely the democratic solution is to let people vote on what is agreed and they we can all say it has public support. Sorry, but I don't understand how suggesting a public vote can be anything but democratic! Yes, we have had a vote, but there was absolutely no clarity on the detail. If people are so sure, as they claim to be, what people voted for, they ought to welcome a vote on the final agreement to shut all the moaning remainers up! Unless they are afraid of real democracy, which of course they are!
  • edited May 2018
    Without re-reading the 260 previous pages, I am sure someone posted that the official Leave website claimed to want to stay in the single market. Subsequently deleted by hardliners after they realised they could not cherry pick the bits of EU they liked. So Bojo, Gove WRM and co are hijacking democracy not actioning it.
  • ANY price is worth paying for blue passports.
  • McBobbin said:

    seth plum said:

    P.S.
    What is a clean brexit?

    What was voted for - leave the EU. That was a starting point, nothing about defining the future relationship with the EU, that is the ending point and the outcome of negotiations.

    Negotiations would then have been based on mitigating the negative consequences for both sides and compromises reached based on a defined known starting point instead of the clusterfuck drooled over by Remainers that serves only the interests of those who support the undermining of the UK's negotiating position.
    Funny, that's not what they are saying here. Can all you quitters please try and focus, and store this in your head to save yourselves from further embarrassment, so I don't have to keep trotting it out every time one of you chooses to forget a fact or two:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xGt3QmRSZY
    That's not what was on the ballot though, was it?
    Anyone would think that the referendum was flawed
    It was, hugely.
This discussion has been closed.

Roland Out Forever!