|
|
Post by bubba on Sept 8, 2019 13:50:35 GMT
BTW for those of you even too exhausted to follow Billy's link, let me just hare with you the how it begins.
MILLIONS of Britons are physically exhausted after spending what feels like decades arguing with people who do not understand anything.
The arrogance is unbridled, these people genuinely believe they are intellectually superior to those holding a different opinion. They aint playing, this isn't some nationwide wum, these people actually believe this crap, that they and they alone are capable of understanding the subject. I hope this proves in time to be nothing more than hollow echo chambers and people aren't brow beaten into having their own mind and own opinion changed by this kind of group arrogance.
But what about people like me voted out and now seriously considering changing that view as I see what is unfolding.know plenty feeling the same way,no truck with anyone who voted leave because I was one of them ,not saying people who want no deal are thick racist whatever just don’t want no deal.in business at senior level so don’t need anyone giving me a lesson on this I know what I see and the implications.if this view applies to a significant number of leavers what is fair and reasonable?
That's fine, you're entitled to your opinion but without wishing to cause offence it's got bugger all to do with the point made in the post you quoted, namely that a lot of remainers and Billy especially in my experience call anybody wanting to leave thick or in this case fcukwits, which is an entirely different matter to you changing your mind. Nobody has or will call you thick for your opinion.
Further you've gone on a little rant about being senior in business and not needing anyone giving you a lesson in this, well who has? Certainly not I.
I don't mind anyone disagreeing with me zulu, free choice is kind of the point, but the post I made that you quoted was mostly about Billy linking to an article calling those who want to leave fcukwits and the general arrogance of that article saying leavers are too simple to understand things, that's what that was about, not about the things in your follow up post, which if that's how you feel I respect your right to your opinion and also accept that you and not all leavers are similarly that rude and arrogant. However this is one particlar p.o.v that leavers are somehow intellectually inferior that has been running for years and it is one way. Not saying insults don't get thrown both ways they do, but this particular insult has taken on a life of it's own where one side now genuinely has a lot of it's supporters thinking that they are genetically more intelligent and considering the bashing you've given me for abusing Pep, I'd have expected you to jump on Billy's post before quoting mine calling him out on it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2019 14:21:18 GMT
I wasn’t trying to jump on anyone I was just asking a reasonable question which is what I thought this thread needed.,accept I probably should have not attached it to your post but to call my comment on business a rant is a bit extreme especially considering some of the other posts on this thread.re pep I have not bashed you,no insults just a different point of view,in fact I just thought the NPP thing was insulting and too soon which is why I posted in the first place.
|
|
|
|
Post by bubba on Sept 8, 2019 15:11:58 GMT
Fair enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by bubba on Sept 8, 2019 17:19:49 GMT
Vive la France
According to the French foreign minister, the EU will REFUSE an extension even if Boris requests one under the current circumstances.
Jean-Yves Le Drian said on Sunday that as things stand, a delay beyond the October 31 deadline would not be granted.
Asked if a Brexit delay was possible, the French minister told Europe 1 radio not under the current conditions.
"We are not going to do [extend] this every three months," he added. "The British must tell us what they want."
He described the current situation as "very worrying".
An extraordinary turn of events with Parliament having voted to legally force the Prime Minister to seek an extension that their aims look like being thwarted by the very European MP's they seek to align themselves with and overturning the Brexit vote.
Should that be the case then Britain would by default leave the EU as promised by BJ on October 31st. Ironies don't end there, it seems the greatest chance that remainers now have of stopping Brexit (let's stop with the delay pretense) is if BJ himself carries out his threat to not seek the extension which could trigger legal action and put us in unchartered waters.
Swallow your pride BJ, we're almost there.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillyNoMatesformerlyTheMadFrog on Sept 8, 2019 17:35:03 GMT
You know as I do the Germans call the shots not the French.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2019 17:46:32 GMT
To be honest this actually smacks of phase two for parliament.
I wouldn't put it passed them to have hatched the plan with EU.
Bully the government into no deal block, refuse extension which leads to parliament then trying to force remain to 'PROTECT US' all from DYING due to lack of medicine. What makes me laugh is project fear related to money and failed I guess mainly because most people ain't rich so stand to lose less. So now it's you wont get supplies you will either starve to death or die with no insulin!
The announcement is rather early and coincidental during the midst of what is going on. It all is geared to dispute the no negotiations! To be honest I don't mind there being none because at present what would be the point in Boris trying to negotiate and talk big about no deal until he had actually over thrown no deal!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by bubba on Sept 8, 2019 17:57:16 GMT
Without a deal or an extension the default is that Britain leaves the EU on October 31st.
There is more backdrop to this story, a strategy to break the constitution of the EU by not having a British commissioner that the EU constitution requires. It is believed on the part of BJ strategists that this action will force the EU to either negotiate a new deal, or allow the deadline to pass, either of which scenarios suit BJ. Furthermore they have now said they do not believe the issue of defying law passed seeking an extension will even be a thing with the EU needing to act, however they do seem from what I've read to have admitted they will not break the law. At the same time the passing of that law is itself, apparently going to be legally challenged.
I don't know whether this strategy will work, but regardless of Parliament getting their law passed to seek another extension, if the EU refuses for whatever reason, this game will finally be over.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2019 18:35:38 GMT
Mays deal will be put through and edited slightly to become Boris deal of sorts.
To be honest if they adjust the date most mp's will sign it off. Its crap too.
|
|
|
|
Post by bubba on Sept 8, 2019 19:27:59 GMT
Mays deal will be put through and edited slightly to become Boris deal of sorts. To be honest if they adjust the date most mp's will sign it off. Its crap too. I'm not so sure, like you and others my feelings as soon as the referendum result came in was that it would not be allowed to stand. There was history with at least 3 other countries previously voting to leave being forced to vote again to get the right answer for the globalists. However with this latest turn of events and time running out it may finally actually be about to happen. In fact if I'm reading it right and the reports are accurate BJ is about to get the no deal handed to him by the EU on a platter that remainers believe is what he really wants anyway, in which case it would be actually really odd if he then really did try to get a deal when he's on the cusp of getting us out without one. |
|
|
|
Post by vendeeblueroger on Sept 8, 2019 21:26:28 GMT
It’s not arrogant to say that the Leave Campaigns Lied shamelessly ... £350 million a week for the NHS and millions of Turks poised to flood into U.K.... You didn’t believe that did you? DID YOU? Lots of people did.. I remember reading the Sun and The Mailjust before the election... everything was going to be easy... of course we would stay in the Single Market.. we could be just like Norway... Be Patriotic! Vote Leave. They were liars and conmen. Of course people are patriotic... We were sold a bag of shit... as the expression goes... Fool me once, shame on you... Fool me Twice, shame on me... that’s why they are so afraid of a People’s Vote to ratify a deal... you are calling me arrogant ... I don’t give a toss... these are the plain facts i d I agree the leave campaign lied shamelessly, it would be intellectually dishonest to claim otherwise, exactly the same as the remain project fear campaign lied shamelessly and it would be intellectually dishonest to claim otherwise.
However all the words, the mud slinging, the we're smart and you're dumb, the good guys and the bad guys (lol) the he said, she said all only serves the remain campaign imo, as said before, there's only one issue that should really matter to anyone.
Can the British people vote out a British government that it doesn't agree with come election time? Answer yes
Can the British people vote out a European government that it doesn't agree with come election time? Answer no
It really is that simple, everything else is window dressing and distraction.
When we vote we vote for an MP ( U.K. election ) or an MEP ( EU election ) . Collectively the number of MPs is added up and the largest party of MPs becomes the Government . As individuals we do not vote for a Government , we vote for an individual MP who may or not be part of the winning party . Each country votes in a slightly different way for its MEPs but there is no collective adding up in a country as different parties exist in each country . What you do get is loose alliances within the EU Parliament that cross individual country boundaries . The U.K. Governments and MEPS ( of all political persuasion ) have voted in favour of over 95% of EU legislation both at Ministerial and Parliament level . So that suggests there is not much that the EU does that our Governments have disagreed with . We have devolved Government in the U.K. in Northern Ireland ( although not currently working ) , Scotland and Wales . This complicates the Remain/Leave situation because as well as MEP level votes you can also measure what an individual U.K. country wants to do by counting up its votes within its boundaries. Scotland is a particular case in point as they voted overall to Remain in the EU in the Referendum . I do appreciate the point Bubba makes and do believe it’s a viewpoint that many people hold ( based on recent opinion polls ) . What is worth noting though is that the next U.K. election will be fought not so much on party lines but fought on Remain/Leave lines . And here we enter various combinations of alliances and coalitions . I strongly suspect that the next U.K. Government will be some form of coalition ! |
|
|
|
Post by vendeeblueroger on Sept 8, 2019 21:50:04 GMT
Vive la France
According to the French foreign minister, the EU will REFUSE an extension even if Boris requests one under the current circumstances.
Jean-Yves Le Drian said on Sunday that as things stand, a delay beyond the October 31 deadline would not be granted.
Asked if a Brexit delay was possible, the French minister told Europe 1 radio not under the current conditions.
"We are not going to do [extend] this every three months," he added. "The British must tell us what they want."
He described the current situation as "very worrying".
An extraordinary turn of events with Parliament having voted to legally force the Prime Minister to seek an extension that their aims look like being thwarted by the very European MP's they seek to align themselves with and overturning the Brexit vote.
Should that be the case then Britain would by default leave the EU as promised by BJ on October 31st. Ironies don't end there, it seems the greatest chance that remainers now have of stopping Brexit (let's stop with the delay pretense) is if BJ himself carries out his threat to not seek the extension which could trigger legal action and put us in unchartered waters.
Swallow your pride BJ, we're almost there.
Note the words “ under the current conditions “ . its pretty obvious from the words Jo Johnson and Amber Rudd have used that they don’t feel BOJO and Co have made any serious attempt to present the EU with new detailed proposals to remove the backstop or amend the Theresa May deal . We appear not to have told the EU what we want to change from the Theresa May deal eg “ the British must tell us what they want “ . Those are “ the current conditions “ the French refer to . Leaving without a deal and suggesting we can tie up trade deals in weeks is both foolish ( because of the tariffs that goods into and out of the U.K. would face , which will lead to higher prices ) and ill informed ( as trade deals take years to negotiate ) . Personally there is no trust in BOJO as he has so often said one thing and done another plus his grasp of detail is appalling . And none of his Cabinet can tell us what we are actually talking about to the EU . I don't think we need a blow by blow account of the talks but it would be nice to know in what areas we are in discussion eg rights of EU citizens in the U.K. , future flights into and from Europe , fishing rights etc . At least give us the feeling that there are some serious discussions going on and it’s not just hot air to say talks are on going ( meeting once a week with EU officials does not sound very active to me ! ) . |
|
|
|
Post by bubba on Sept 8, 2019 22:39:02 GMT
When we vote we vote for an MP ( U.K. election ) or an MEP ( EU election ) . Collectively the number of MPs is added up and the largest party of MPs becomes the Government . As individuals we do not vote for a Government , we vote for an individual MP who may or not be part of the winning party . Each country votes in a slightly different way for its MEPs but there is no collective adding up in a country as different parties exist in each country . What you do get is loose alliances within the EU Parliament that cross individual country boundaries . The U.K. Governments and MEPS ( of all political persuasion ) have voted in favour of over 95% of EU legislation both at Ministerial and Parliament level . So that suggests there is not much that the EU does that our Governments have disagreed with . We have devolved Government in the U.K. in Northern Ireland ( although not currently working ) , Scotland and Wales . This complicates the Remain/Leave situation because as well as MEP level votes you can also measure what an individual U.K. country wants to do by counting up its votes within its boundaries. Scotland is a particular case in point as they voted overall to Remain in the EU in the Referendum . I do appreciate the point Bubba makes and do believe it’s a viewpoint that many people hold ( based on recent opinion polls ) . What is worth noting though is that the next U.K. election will be fought not so much on party lines but fought on Remain/Leave lines . And here we enter various combinations of alliances and coalitions . I strongly suspect that the next U.K. Government will be some form of coalition ! Agree with all that and still the fact remains, Brits can not collectively vote out an EU government as they can a UK government and that is the crux of the matter. Whether we have previously agreed with 50% of EU legislation or 100% is no guarantee of future consensus and by remaining in we give up our sole ability to determine who governs us and would be bound by laws and legislation we would be powerless to overturn, EVEN if we elected all our MEP's on that mandate. The perfect antidote to one man one vote, when even collectively a nation of people are rendered powerless. |
|
|
|
Post by bubba on Sept 8, 2019 22:57:46 GMT
Vive la France
According to the French foreign minister, the EU will REFUSE an extension even if Boris requests one under the current circumstances.
Jean-Yves Le Drian said on Sunday that as things stand, a delay beyond the October 31 deadline would not be granted.
Asked if a Brexit delay was possible, the French minister told Europe 1 radio not under the current conditions.
"We are not going to do [extend] this every three months," he added. "The British must tell us what they want."
He described the current situation as "very worrying".
An extraordinary turn of events with Parliament having voted to legally force the Prime Minister to seek an extension that their aims look like being thwarted by the very European MP's they seek to align themselves with and overturning the Brexit vote.
Should that be the case then Britain would by default leave the EU as promised by BJ on October 31st. Ironies don't end there, it seems the greatest chance that remainers now have of stopping Brexit (let's stop with the delay pretense) is if BJ himself carries out his threat to not seek the extension which could trigger legal action and put us in unchartered waters.
Swallow your pride BJ, we're almost there.
Note the words “ under the current conditions “ . its pretty obvious from the words Jo Johnson and Amber Rudd have used that they don’t feel BOJO and Co have made any serious attempt to present the EU with new detailed proposals to remove the backstop or amend the Theresa May deal . We appear not to have told the EU what we want to change from the Theresa May deal eg “ the British must tell us what they want “ . Those are “ the current conditions “ the French refer to . Leaving without a deal and suggesting we can tie up trade deals in weeks is both foolish ( because of the tariffs that goods into and out of the U.K. would face , which will lead to higher prices ) and ill informed ( as trade deals take years to negotiate ) . Personally there is no trust in BOJO as he has so often said one thing and done another plus his grasp of detail is appalling . And none of his Cabinet can tell us what we are actually talking about to the EU . I don't think we need a blow by blow account of the talks but it would be nice to know in what areas we are in discussion eg rights of EU citizens in the U.K. , future flights into and from Europe , fishing rights etc . At least give us the feeling that there are some serious discussions going on and it’s not just hot air to say talks are on going ( meeting once a week with EU officials does not sound very active to me ! ) . As far as I can tell whilst BJ has been legally compelled (pending legal challenge) to seek an extension, the terms of that newly passed law don't extend to instructing him to try to negotiate a deal, just ask for the extension. I'm prepared to be corrected on this but that's the state of play as I understand it.
If he complies and asks for an extension as things stand and as reported the EU say no, then the default position is a no deal exit on October 31st.
I think the remainers may have erred in only seeking to force BJ to ask for an extension. Whilst it was widely reported as Parliament blocking no deal, as I understand it that is not strictly true.
The legislation they passed Wednesday says the prime minister must seek a three-month Brexit extension (until January 2020) unless he somehow manages to get a Brexit deal through Parliament by October 19 or unless Parliament explicitly votes to leave the EU without a deal before that date.
News is changing fast, but it seems to me if that truly is the EU position, then a no deal exit has just been delivered to BJ on a silver platter.
|
|
|
|
Post by bubba on Sept 9, 2019 11:10:32 GMT
The EU’s chief Brexit co-ordinator has backed warnings from France that a request for another delay to Brexit will be refused.
Guy Verhofstadt said it would be 'unacceptable' for Brussels to push back the UK's departure date from the European Union in the current circumstances.
In a series of tweets, Mr Verhofstadt backed the decision not to grant another delay.
“Foreign Minister Le Drian is right: yet another extension for Brexit is unacceptable, unless the deadlock in London is broken"
|
|
|
|
Post by bubba on Sept 9, 2019 11:17:42 GMT
Boris Johnson is reportedly planning to sabotage the Remainer plan to stop a no deal Brexit by sending a letter to the EU requesting an extension, as the new law requires - then in another missive, explaining why they should ignore it. Today, a Bill passed by opposition parties and Tory rebels will receive Royal Assent. It insists that – if a deal is not reached – Mr Johnson must agree to postpone Brexit for at least three months.
A source told The Telegraph: 'There is a prescribed letter that has to be sent...Does that stop the Prime Minister sending other documents to the EU? I don't think it does.
'A political explainer perhaps, as to where the Government's policy is. It has to make clear that the Government is asking for an extension, but let's not forget what the next step is.
'Once that is done, the Europeans are going to ask: 'Why? What is the reason? [What] if the government said: 'We don't have any reasons for an extension.
'There is a clear path now: the Europeans need to refuse an extension.'
Yesterday, Mr Raab insisted ministers would 'adhere to the law' but said government lawyers would look 'very carefully' at what it requires the Prime Minister to do. He told Sky News's Sophy Ridge on Sunday: 'We will adhere to the law but we will also, because this is such a bad piece of legislation – the Surrender Bill that Jeremy Corbyn backed – we will also want to test to the limit what it does actually lawfully require. We will look very carefully, legally, at what it requires and what it doesn't require. I think that's not only the lawful thing to do, it's also the responsible thing to do and again I'll repeat that legislation is lousy.'
In a separate interview, Home Secretary Sajid Javid said Mr Johnson would not ask for an extension at the EU Council on October 17 and 18. Describing the Bill as an attempt to 'kneecap' Britain's negotiating position, he said ministers would 'look at our options' on October 19.
On that date the law kicks in if no agreement has been reached. It tells the Prime Minister to seek an extension until January 31 and accept any extension the EU agrees.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2019 11:24:33 GMT
I do tend to agree that BJ will struggle to block the bill.
Where as the 350m a week case fell down and prorogation would always fall down because it’s actually constitutional the mere fact that a law passed would be hard pushed to be ignored using other laws because this is a newer law and I assume it’s also had all the amendments adherence to.
It would be funny if the new law had a slip up on it. I doubt the loophole exists.
I do think he could force a general election through though which in reality is the only thing stopping him power grabbing back then pushing through a bill to overturn the no deal block assuming he gets the majority.
A general election by law could be crucial and argued that parliament is constantly in a state of paralysis
|
|
|
|
Post by bubba on Sept 9, 2019 11:27:24 GMT
As suggested previously whilst the bill forcing BJ to seek an extension was passed, it was imo wrongly reported as a bill to block no deal in the strictest sense.
That may have been the true ultimate aim, but in only seeking to force the PM to ask for an extension, it seems the remainers just presumed the EU would as a matter of course grant it, which it now appears is actually not the case, rendering the new law pointless.
Further even if compelled to seek the extension it seems the PM will at the same time make it clear it would not be in the EU's interests to grant one, whilst at the same time allegedly seeking a new deal. Like his opponents I'm as dubious of the sincerity of the last element as I am of the EU's willingness to move away, dare I say it, from their red lines.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2019 14:37:21 GMT
Yeah I guess he can rock up tell them he has to request by law to extend but also tell them he will fight it legally and do everything possible to thwart a no deal block.
That should create enough fuss for them to realise they have to force no deal themselves to avoid the continuation of the circus which is bad for all sides.
Beauty of this is he can blame financial meltdowns on EU lol
|
|
|
|
Post by bubba on Sept 9, 2019 19:31:52 GMT
Guy Verhofstadt has capped off a busy day with a tweet commenting on the news that John Bercow will step down as speaker of The House of Commons.
John #Bercow is a driven speaker and gifted orator but above all the keeper of the great British parliamentary tradition. I would love if we could welcome him in the European Commission or European Parliament
Yes Mr Speaker, you've certainly done your bit to earn your seat on the EU Gravy Train.
|
|
|
|
Post by brummie1875 on Sept 9, 2019 21:03:09 GMT
I was all for the UK regaining it's sovereignty by leaving with a decent deal.
Three years on and in my view, the sensible decision is to remain.
Manufacturers are shifting work that was, or should, being done in UK factories to the rest of the EU. That is not scaremongering, that is fact.
Products need to pass tests to conform to standards that was previously ok because we are in the EU. Packaging that states made in the EU will have to be changed.
There is not enough warehouse space to stockpile raw materials, and increased stock holding raises prices. No need for propaganda, just do the maths.
Cross border movement of materials/ parts mean that just in time has more flexibility and costs built in.
For better, or for worse (probably worse) we live in a changed world. If citizens across the EU start a social media campaign to stop buying UK goods, that will be carnage.
Northern Ireland was never mentioned (not even by the ill prepared remainers), and the EU will never accept an open border. Why would they? Why would we want to risk opening up wounds due to the underlying bigotry?
My preferences at the referendum?
1. Leave with a good deal.
2. Remain.
3. Leave with a crap deal.
4. No deal.
The reason why we are in the position we are in now is there is no majority for any possible outcome. Never has been, never will be.
Besides, if we prove to be such hapless negotiators with the EU, heaven help us when we face the rest of the world being in the desperate position we are now.
The USA will take us to the cleaners, like they have with most of the UK businesses that went there (Tesco, Body Shop), and will demand that everything is on the table, including goods that fulfill their standards and not ours, as well as access to our NHS.
I believe that we messed the negotiations up by declaring Article 50 too early, and that allowed the EU to run down the clock.
In our current position, the best option for the prosperity of the man in the street is to stick with the devil we know, because the devil we don't know will cost everyone of us except the usual elite would will be cashing in on our misery.
|
|
|
|
Post by bubba on Sept 9, 2019 23:01:13 GMT
I was all for the UK regaining it's sovereignty by leaving with a decent deal. Three years on and in my view, the sensible decision is to remain. Manufacturers are shifting work that was, or should, being done in UK factories to the rest of the EU. That is not scaremongering, that is fact. Products need to pass tests to conform to standards that was previously ok because we are in the EU. Packaging that states made in the EU will have to be changed. There is not enough warehouse space to stockpile raw materials, and increased stock holding raises prices. No need for propaganda, just do the maths. Cross border movement of materials/ parts mean that just in time has more flexibility and costs built in. For better, or for worse (probably worse) we live in a changed world. If citizens across the EU start a social media campaign to stop buying UK goods, that will be carnage. Northern Ireland was never mentioned (not even by the ill prepared remainers), and the EU will never accept an open border. Why would they? Why would we want to risk opening up wounds due to the underlying bigotry? My preferences at the referendum? 1. Leave with a good deal. 2. Remain. 3. Leave with a crap deal. 4. No deal. The reason why we are in the position we are in now is there is no majority for any possible outcome. Never has been, never will be. Besides, if we prove to be such hapless negotiators with the EU, heaven help us when we face the rest of the world being in the desperate position we are now. The USA will take us to the cleaners, like they have with most of the UK businesses that went there (Tesco, Body Shop), and will demand that everything is on the table, including goods that fulfill their standards and not ours, as well as access to our NHS. I believe that we messed the negotiations up by declaring Article 50 too early, and that allowed the EU to run down the clock. In our current position, the best option for the prosperity of the man in the street is to stick with the devil we know, because the devil we don't know will cost everyone of us except the usual elite would will be cashing in on our misery.
Manufacturers are shifting work that was, or should, being done in UK factories to the rest of the EU. That is not scaremongering, that is fact.
Manufacturers have always and will always choose to periodically move their production around the Continent and indeed the globe, even during the entirety of our EU membership this has happened, sometimes we benefit, other times not, this is fact.
Products need to pass tests to conform to standards that was previously ok because we are in the EU. Packaging that states made in the EU will have to be changed.
Surely any products currently produced here already pass such standards otherwise would not be permitted, it's the whole point of having those standards, so the reality is that as far as standards go all current products MUST already conform and have been tested where tests were deemed necessary. Changing packaging? Well changing two letters of text on a computer for label printing doesn't sound too onerus really.
There is not enough warehouse space to stockpile raw materials, and increased stock holding raises prices. No need for propaganda, just do the maths.
Why do raw materials need stockpiling? Genuine question, I've seen this mentioned elsewhere with no explanation but I fail to understand why post Brexit we suddenly need larger stockpiles of goods than before. Consumption of goods I would imagine is relatively constant on a national scale, presumably we import those goods on an as needed basis with an element of stockpling, but I don't understand where the need for greater stockpiling arises. This may be a lack of knowledge on my part, but I can't reconcile a constant on the demand side equaling an increased need for stockpiling.
Cross border movement of materials/ parts mean that just in time has more flexibility and costs built in.
I'm not sure what this means, suspect there's missing words in here.
For better, or for worse (probably worse) we live in a changed world. If citizens across the EU start a social media campaign to stop buying UK goods, that will be carnage.
Well I suppose. IF that happens and IF our European friends wish to behave that way simply to punish Britons for exercising our democratic free will, then you'd have to question the value and wisdom in seeking ever closer political and financial union with friends that would turn on us so readily.
Northern Ireland was never mentioned (not even by the ill prepared remainers), and the EU will never accept an open border. Why would they? Why would we want to risk opening up wounds due to the underlying bigotry?
Well you say they would never accept but in the event of no deal they actually wouldn't have a say in the matter, sovereign nations choose their own forms of border. However that's just a technicality, for the historical/cultural reasons you mention a hard border is unlikely to be considered and in fact I think BJ has today said as much. There's also suggestion today from Ireland about the island of Ireland being made a special economic area. I'm not sure of the technicalities of such an agreement but apparently it solves a lot of issues hopefully including an open border in the event of a deal being agreed.
The reason why we are in the position we are in now is there is no majority for any possible outcome. Never has been, never will be.
Never is a long time, especially with the pace at which events are currently unfolding. It's been suggested the next election would be fought largely on Brexit grounds which could see one side either secure a majority or be able to form a coalition with a majority and with purging possibly having taken place of party dissenters there may be more scope for majority in Parliament on Brexit,, though I admit that's far from certain. Of course as mentioned before, without a deal or an agreed extension Britain is due to exit without a deal at the end of next month as the default position.
Besides, if we prove to be such hapless negotiators with the EU, heaven help us when we face the rest of the world being in the desperate position we are now.
We are the 6th biggest GDP nation in the world, we're hardly cannon fodder for all and sundry. China and the US as the two most economically dominant nations clearly hold an upper hand when negotiatng with the rest of the world but even they want to maximise their trade and they can't do that by holding other nations to ransom. Trade at any level requires two parties to get something from the deal.
The USA will take us to the cleaners, like they have with most of the UK businesses that went there (Tesco, Body Shop), and will demand that everything is on the table, including goods that fulfill their standards and not ours, as well as access to our NHS.
BJ has already declared the NHS is off the table and as a sovereign nation if he ever dared he'd be voted out and a party willing to restore the current condition put in power. This is entirely scaremongering imo. I will concede I'd have more concern re other standards but more on what we may be forced to accept as US imports than any excessive requirements on our exports going there. As for taking us to the cleaners, as said above, every nation wants to maximise it's trade, and that is not best achieved by bullying and blackmailing trading partners and especially close political allies. Sure they'd leverage their top dog position, as they do with everyone else, but quite a lot of less advanced and less robust economies seem to manage to trade with the US without much problem.
I believe that we messed the negotiations up by declaring Article 50 too early, and that allowed the EU to run down the clock.
Perhaps, although I thought they actually were supposed to want a deal with us, they've granted a couple of extensions and were like the cat that got the cream when May agreed her deal with them. This is entirely my personal opinion but I've felt France in particular of all EU countries have been most keen to run the clock down as you say, imo because they see us being out as an opportunity to claim some of London's financial centre for itself.
In our current position, the best option for the prosperity of the man in the street is to stick with the devil we know, because the devil we don't know will cost everyone of us except the usual elite would will be cashing in on our misery.
The usual elite will be cashing in regardless of what happens with Brexit, the same way they cash in regardless of who we put in Parliament. Whilst I accept there are challenges in change, I refuse to accept anybody's predictions good or bad for the future because there are a multitude of factors to consider and because I've yet to come across anyone that guarantee such predictions, I mean, there's a great many people with an opinion and a great many of them state future events as facts, but that's really not the same as knowing.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bluenose_68 on Sept 10, 2019 12:36:33 GMT
In retrospect a rational government would have done this the morning after the ref:
1) Made it clear that Brexit had to be taken away from Party politics and formed a cross party group to negotiate and deliver an outcome
2) Got agreement in parliament around what Brexit actually meant. ie was it No deal, Canada, Norway, Switzerland
3) Given parliment a public deadline to deliver the first phase by
Its the fact this issue has allowed to be party political as well as no one actually defining what Brexit actually is, is what has caused all the problems.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 12:58:20 GMT
Sinking feeling that we will have to ask for extension and the response will be 2 years or none at all then parliament will vote after the summit to demand its acceptable. Then we are stuck in limbo for two more years with no elections because as soon as we ask Parliament will block it because they all know a Tory brexit coalition will be enough to ride through a law change on no deal. Whilst Boris is on a minority government he is a sitting duck to be refused on every move.
If he can’t use the contingency act he is basically fcuked.
Even the parliament act could mean amendments to suit remain like young voters.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bluenose_68 on Sept 10, 2019 15:01:08 GMT
Tilts....fair analysis- although i dont believe for a moment Johnson wants to be responsible for No Deal- when he said "we need to make them believe we are happy with no deal" he wasnt just referring to the europeans- more so aimed at his base
This has always been a Tory vanity project. Nothing more nothing less They are shit scared of losing votes to the right and they know the only way to nullify Farage and his party is to play to the no deal card.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 15:49:30 GMT
But if Boris can’t win a vote even to decide to change the biscuits in the tea room we have a serious problem.
At present he is at the mercy of a parliament that could vote to revoke article 50 and he can’t stop it.
The opposition could think fcuk it once it’s reversed even if they lost next election by landslide what will the appetite be from the public to start all over again?
Even now I know at least ten brexiteers who have said they are never voting again for anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bluenose_68 on Sept 10, 2019 16:14:24 GMT
TBH i cant see any major party going for Revoke. Sure the lib dems will pitch that purely to win the strong remain vote- but realistically none of the other parties will go down that route.
Also whilst i get the apathy and cynicism about voting- i would argue its peoples lack of interest in politics that has caused this.
If more people took an interest in the day to day and held their MPs more accountable we would be in a far better place. A more educated and informed electorate, and a more accountable set of MPs is a win win for everyone
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 17:44:32 GMT
6 of them are my age and have always voted general and local they are just sick to death of the whole farce.
Imagine a general election to vote in a party but waiting nearly four years for them to get into power!!!
I can see why these people have just had enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by billybeer on Sept 10, 2019 18:02:04 GMT
TBH i cant see any major party going for Revoke. Sure the lib dems will pitch that purely to win the strong remain vote- but realistically none of the other parties will go down that route. Also whilst i get the apathy and cynicism about voting- i would argue its peoples lack of interest in politics that has caused this. If more people took an interest in the day to day and held their MPs more accountable we would be in a far better place. A more educated and informed electorate, and a more accountable set of MPs is a win win for everyone Oh i will join in again as this is a reasonable comment. revoke and Remain are two different things... one is a means to an end, and Remain is an end, a full srop to Brexit... Lib Dem policy is to Remain... Revoking Article 50 is their preferred method... ain’t gonna happen because they are not going to form a majority government... but their intent is clear and unambiguous... failing that they will back a referendum on a deal and campaign to Remain... this is also current Labour Policy (although that is continually bent by Corbyn and Seamus Milne grabbing their Marxist mitts on it and trying to yank it towards a socialist Brexit)..... so the Lib Dem’s, Labour and the SNP and a few Tories support this. revocation is entirely in the grasp of the PM... it can be used as an emergency brake... however Johnson is unlikely to use it and a caretaker PM in a Government of National Unity would never dare use it, as they would be accused of sabotaging Brexit (although technically Brexit could still happen via a GEunder a Party Manifesto... which should have been in the first place. luckily the French have offered a get out of Jail free card byy offering a two year extension... hence the change to this threads title by the gibbering Brexiters who read everything upside down in the first place... they argue a three month extension is too short a time, and that either the British Leave or accept this to renegotiate the deal... of course the Brits could accept extension but leave before end of extension, but in reality it will probably kill off Brexit... a caretaker PM or even a stand in Tory PM (assuming Not Johnson though) might do this... they have bought time but not killed off Brexit... by the way I am amused by Bubbas long winded contortions ... how he pretends to be cynical and worldly yet writes assuring us that “BJ has taken the NHS off the table in trade talks with US”... does he not realise that Johnson is renowned as an inveterate liar and will say anything to anybody to keep himself in power... and it also shows a wondrous niavity about the trade process... Just as his hero promises a “ have Cake and Eat it Brexit”, Bubba with his “I will not be defined” assertions offers “have cake and eat it” responsibility.... it’s quite convenient as it means you can never be wrong... But it’s pointless in real life and even more so on anonymous Internet forums... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 19:46:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by brummie1875 on Sept 10, 2019 21:55:26 GMT
I was all for the UK regaining it's sovereignty by leaving with a decent deal. Three years on and in my view, the sensible decision is to remain. Manufacturers are shifting work that was, or should, being done in UK factories to the rest of the EU. That is not scaremongering, that is fact. Products need to pass tests to conform to standards that was previously ok because we are in the EU. Packaging that states made in the EU will have to be changed. There is not enough warehouse space to stockpile raw materials, and increased stock holding raises prices. No need for propaganda, just do the maths. Cross border movement of materials/ parts mean that just in time has more flexibility and costs built in. For better, or for worse (probably worse) we live in a changed world. If citizens across the EU start a social media campaign to stop buying UK goods, that will be carnage. Northern Ireland was never mentioned (not even by the ill prepared remainers), and the EU will never accept an open border. Why would they? Why would we want to risk opening up wounds due to the underlying bigotry? My preferences at the referendum? 1. Leave with a good deal. 2. Remain. 3. Leave with a crap deal. 4. No deal. The reason why we are in the position we are in now is there is no majority for any possible outcome. Never has been, never will be. Besides, if we prove to be such hapless negotiators with the EU, heaven help us when we face the rest of the world being in the desperate position we are now. The USA will take us to the cleaners, like they have with most of the UK businesses that went there (Tesco, Body Shop), and will demand that everything is on the table, including goods that fulfill their standards and not ours, as well as access to our NHS. I believe that we messed the negotiations up by declaring Article 50 too early, and that allowed the EU to run down the clock. In our current position, the best option for the prosperity of the man in the street is to stick with the devil we know, because the devil we don't know will cost everyone of us except the usual elite would will be cashing in on our misery.
Manufacturers are shifting work that was, or should, being done in UK factories to the rest of the EU. That is not scaremongering, that is fact.
Manufacturers have always and will always choose to periodically move their production around the Continent and indeed the globe, even during the entirety of our EU membership this has happened, sometimes we benefit, other times not, this is fact.
Products need to pass tests to conform to standards that was previously ok because we are in the EU. Packaging that states made in the EU will have to be changed.
Surely any products currently produced here already pass such standards otherwise would not be permitted, it's the whole point of having those standards, so the reality is that as far as standards go all current products MUST already conform and have been tested where tests were deemed necessary. Changing packaging? Well changing two letters of text on a computer for label printing doesn't sound too onerus really.
There is not enough warehouse space to stockpile raw materials, and increased stock holding raises prices. No need for propaganda, just do the maths.
Why do raw materials need stockpiling? Genuine question, I've seen this mentioned elsewhere with no explanation but I fail to understand why post Brexit we suddenly need larger stockpiles of goods than before. Consumption of goods I would imagine is relatively constant on a national scale, presumably we import those goods on an as needed basis with an element of stockpling, but I don't understand where the need for greater stockpiling arises. This may be a lack of knowledge on my part, but I can't reconcile a constant on the demand side equaling an increased need for stockpiling.
Cross border movement of materials/ parts mean that just in time has more flexibility and costs built in.
I'm not sure what this means, suspect there's missing words in here.
For better, or for worse (probably worse) we live in a changed world. If citizens across the EU start a social media campaign to stop buying UK goods, that will be carnage.
Well I suppose. IF that happens and IF our European friends wish to behave that way simply to punish Britons for exercising our democratic free will, then you'd have to question the value and wisdom in seeking ever closer political and financial union with friends that would turn on us so readily.
Northern Ireland was never mentioned (not even by the ill prepared remainers), and the EU will never accept an open border. Why would they? Why would we want to risk opening up wounds due to the underlying bigotry?
Well you say they would never accept but in the event of no deal they actually wouldn't have a say in the matter, sovereign nations choose their own forms of border. However that's just a technicality, for the historical/cultural reasons you mention a hard border is unlikely to be considered and in fact I think BJ has today said as much. There's also suggestion today from Ireland about the island of Ireland being made a special economic area. I'm not sure of the technicalities of such an agreement but apparently it solves a lot of issues hopefully including an open border in the event of a deal being agreed.
The reason why we are in the position we are in now is there is no majority for any possible outcome. Never has been, never will be.
Never is a long time, especially with the pace at which events are currently unfolding. It's been suggested the next election would be fought largely on Brexit grounds which could see one side either secure a majority or be able to form a coalition with a majority and with purging possibly having taken place of party dissenters there may be more scope for majority in Parliament on Brexit,, though I admit that's far from certain. Of course as mentioned before, without a deal or an agreed extension Britain is due to exit without a deal at the end of next month as the default position.
Besides, if we prove to be such hapless negotiators with the EU, heaven help us when we face the rest of the world being in the desperate position we are now.
We are the 6th biggest GDP nation in the world, we're hardly cannon fodder for all and sundry. China and the US as the two most economically dominant nations clearly hold an upper hand when negotiatng with the rest of the world but even they want to maximise their trade and they can't do that by holding other nations to ransom. Trade at any level requires two parties to get something from the deal.
The USA will take us to the cleaners, like they have with most of the UK businesses that went there (Tesco, Body Shop), and will demand that everything is on the table, including goods that fulfill their standards and not ours, as well as access to our NHS.
BJ has already declared the NHS is off the table and as a sovereign nation if he ever dared he'd be voted out and a party willing to restore the current condition put in power. This is entirely scaremongering imo. I will concede I'd have more concern re other standards but more on what we may be forced to accept as US imports than any excessive requirements on our exports going there. As for taking us to the cleaners, as said above, every nation wants to maximise it's trade, and that is not best achieved by bullying and blackmailing trading partners and especially close political allies. Sure they'd leverage their top dog position, as they do with everyone else, but quite a lot of less advanced and less robust economies seem to manage to trade with the US without much problem.
I believe that we messed the negotiations up by declaring Article 50 too early, and that allowed the EU to run down the clock.
Perhaps, although I thought they actually were supposed to want a deal with us, they've granted a couple of extensions and were like the cat that got the cream when May agreed her deal with them. This is entirely my personal opinion but I've felt France in particular of all EU countries have been most keen to run the clock down as you say, imo because they see us being out as an opportunity to claim some of London's financial centre for itself.
In our current position, the best option for the prosperity of the man in the street is to stick with the devil we know, because the devil we don't know will cost everyone of us except the usual elite would will be cashing in on our misery.
The usual elite will be cashing in regardless of what happens with Brexit, the same way they cash in regardless of who we put in Parliament. Whilst I accept there are challenges in change, I refuse to accept anybody's predictions good or bad for the future because there are a multitude of factors to consider and because I've yet to come across anyone that guarantee such predictions, I mean, there's a great many people with an opinion and a great many of them state future events as facts, but that's really not the same as knowing.
Bubba, You've used a lot of generalisations as a smoke screen to the damage that Brexit will ultimately cause. Your approach is along the lines of the gloves don't fit, you must acquit. I have seen what is going on, what doesn't make it into the Brexit supporting press, and it isn't pretty. B1875 |
|
