BREXIT

[Scully]

14 minutes ago, henry d said:

Twisting words there, leaving with or without a deal is leaving (I highlighted it just in case you missed it) as that was the outcome of the vote, you cannot have the choice of deal/no deal as neither were on the ballot paper. Sauce for the goose etc.

Not at all. Anything which ties us to the EU isn't leaving. The 'scare' campaign made it abundantly clear; this was a once in a lifetime vote and out meant out. Which part of that do you not understand, as I can't really make it any simpler? 

[oowee]

3 minutes ago, Scully said:

Not at all. Anything which ties us to the EU isn't leaving. The 'scare' campaign made it abundantly clear; this was a once in a lifetime vote and out meant out. Which part of that do you not understand, as I can't really make it any simpler? 

Surely the only way not to be tied to the EU is not to trade with it. 

[Walker570]

4 minutes ago, oowee said:

Surely the only way not to be tied to the EU is not to trade with it. 

That is absolute round bouncy things.... we will not be tied to any other country who wishes to trade with us.   Eventually it will sink in to the many 'industries' in the marvellously unsuccesful EU,  and that includes things like wine and cheese etc etc., that companies produce over there and they sell in large amounts to us.  The possibility of losing that rade and having to make up the 39 billion will eventually sink in.

[oowee]

To trade agricultural goods we will either pay tariff set by the EU or abide by EU regs. If we get the hoped for trade deal we will abide by rules such as, pesticides limits, gm, animal welfare, waste management, drug use, and so on. Either way we will still buy from and sell to the EU and therefore in one form or another tied to the EU tied to the tune of 46% ish of our economy. 

The unsuccessful EU economy is worth Euro 3 936 000 000 000 a year so one of the three largest in the world alongside China and the US so worth looking at. 

[Scully]

30 minutes ago, oowee said:

Surely the only way not to be tied to the EU is not to trade with it. 

Rubbish. We can trade with any country we want if the will is there; it doesn't mean we have to be 'tied' to it and abide by its laws, nor fund its empire building to the tune of billions per annum.

What is it that people are so scared of losing that it means they are willing to give up any say in the way an organisation is run, in order to secure it? It genuinely baffles me.

 

 

[oowee]

Just now, Scully said:

Rubbish. We can trade with any country we want if the will is there; it doesn't mean we have to be 'tied' to it and abide by its laws, nor fund its empire building to the tune of billions per annum.

What is it that people are so scared of losing that it means they are willing to give up any say in the way an organisation is run, in order to secure it? It genuinely baffles me.

 

 

We can trade with any country yes. Under wto terms paying the tariff that country sets. Paying that fee will go into funding that trading block.

If we don't want to pay we will not trade. Or we have to do a trade deal. If we do a trade deal other controls come in. Ask yourself why it takes so long to complete a trade deal? It's not rocket science, but the point being that trade comes with ties and the closer the working the more the ties and that's before we talk about geographic proximity, where we share two borders and the obvious implications regarding the movement of people. 

It will not be possible under any form of brexit for the UK (or what is left of it after Boris) to not have ties with the EU. 

[Scully]

5 minutes ago, oowee said:

We can trade with any country yes. Under wto terms paying the tariff that country sets. Paying that fee will go into funding that trading block.

If we don't want to pay we will not trade. Or we have to do a trade deal. If we do a trade deal other controls come in. Ask yourself why it takes so long to complete a trade deal? It's not rocket science, but the point being that trade comes with ties and the closer the working the more the ties and that's before we talk about geographic proximity, where we share two borders and the obvious implications regarding the movement of people. 

It will not be possible under any form of brexit for the UK (or what is left of it after Boris) to not have ties with the EU. 

Don't other countries trade with other countries without being bound by legislation or bureaucracy which interferes with anything other than those trade deals? Why do we have to subsidise Turkey or Poland just to trade with France, or Germany, or Spain? Could it be because subsequent politicians over decades have integrated us further and further into the EU empire, that's why. If it's such a wonderful thing, It makes one wonder why our politicians gave us the referendum doesn't it! 😀

It isn't, or wasn't, what those who voted to join the EEC were led to believe it would be.

What are you so scared of that you are willing to cede your freedom of choice for? 

[Centrepin]

Errr, isn't it November now? Didn't we leave in October?🤔

I've slept since then.

🙈🙉🙊

[Dave-G]

If I leave a golf club it doesn't mean I can't visit it as a guest or supply it with any beer, it means I no longer wish to pay to be a signed up member. 

[oowee]

33 minutes ago, Scully said:

Don't other countries trade with other countries without being bound by legislation or bureaucracy which interferes with anything other than those trade deals? Why do we have to subsidise Turkey or Poland just to trade with France, or Germany, or Spain? Could it be because subsequent politicians over decades have integrated us further and further into the EU empire, that's why. If it's such a wonderful thing, It makes one wonder why our politicians gave us the referendum doesn't it! 😀

It isn't, or wasn't, what those who voted to join the EEC were led to believe it would be.

What are you so scared of that you are willing to cede your freedom of choice for? 

Does anyone have complete freedom of choice? The more global the economy the more strings and obligations. The closer the partner the greater the ties. like it or not. 

We trade $9.5bn with Turkey each year and $6.4bn with Poland.

[JohnfromUK]

41 minutes ago, Dave-G said:

If I leave a golf club it doesn't mean I can't visit it as a guest or supply it with any beer, it means I no longer wish to pay to be a signed up member. 

That is true, but after leaving you will have to pay a much higher green fee and maybe a non member surcarge on other things like for example parking, and should you wish to supply it with beer, you will have to accept that they will put on a large markup per pint, and you will only be able to supply beer that meets their standards for things like labelling, ingredients.

They will make things as difficult as possible - because they ate a very protectionist closed market.

[oowee]

4 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

They will make things as difficult as possible - because they ate a very protectionist closed market.

They will demand high standards for market access. 

[Scully]

2 hours ago, oowee said:

Does anyone have complete freedom of choice? The more global the economy the more strings and obligations. The closer the partner the greater the ties. like it or not. 

We trade $9.5bn with Turkey each year and $6.4bn with Poland.

I had the freedom of choice to vote to leave; it isn't me who is trying to subvert and overturn that vote. I have the freedom of choice of whom I want to vote for in the UK, which in turn means I vote against those whom I don't wish to be governed by; this isn't something I can apply to the EU, yet they wish to govern me. How is that right?

What is it you are so scared of that you are willing to cede those hard fought rights for? 

The fact you always answer my questions with questions doesn't exactly convince me you have any answers. We can trade with other countries outside the EU without being bound by whatever legislation ( outside of that relevant to trade ) they decide to inflict on us; why do we have to be tied to the EU to the extent they can create laws by which we are bound, which have nothing to with trade, in order to trade with them? Why do we have to subside over twenty other countries in order to benefit from trade deals with some of them?

 

Edited November 3, 2019 by Scully

[Scully]

6 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

That is true, but after leaving you will have to pay a much higher green fee and maybe a non member surcarge on other things like for example parking, and should you wish to supply it with beer, you will have to accept that they will put on a large markup per pint, and you will only be able to supply beer that meets their standards for things like labelling, ingredients.

They will make things as difficult as possible - because they ate a very protectionist closed market.

At least you retain the freedom of choice to take your business elsewhere, sure of the fact the golf course isn't demanding you subsidise it's second club which can't pay its way, or leave your front door open at all times in case a complete stranger ( immigrant ) wants a room for the night! 😃

[oowee]

We vote directly for the EU parliament its approval is required for EU laws. The President needs approval for action from the Parliament we vote for. The UK's PM with those across the EU is responsible for the overall direction and political agenda of the EU. 

Why should anyone be scared of ceding some control with trade? We will give that control whether we are in or out of the EU. When we trade with other nations outside of the EU we already agree to be bound by controls. When we agree a trade deal with the US we will agree more controls. When we agree a trade deal with the EU then more controls. 

If you have any doubt ask why Google is paying the EU $5bn.

[henry d]

Bad analogy full stop

[Dave-G]

The problem that so many of us have with the EU is they inflict so many completely unrelated rules and diktats onto us, like for example the ECJ.

Perhaps someone could explain how joining up to a common market would have us see that coming?

[das]

26 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

That is true, but after leaving you will have to pay a much higher green fee and maybe a non member surcarge on other things like for example parking, and should you wish to supply it with beer, you will have to accept that they will put on a large markup per pint, and you will only be able to supply beer that meets their standards for things like labelling, ingredients.

They will make things as difficult as possible - because they ate a very protectionist closed market.

Yes, I will pay a higher green fee as a visitor, but then I can choose to play as I feel, when I want. But, I won't be paying a £1000 + membership subscription. IE I am free from the tie of the club.   What the golf club choose to make as a markup on beer, food and other incidentals is entirely up to them. They will soon find out if their prices are too high. As far as green fee prices go, check your nearest golf club, all fees will be online. As far as non member surcharges go, never heard of them in my 30 years of golf.

Edited November 3, 2019 by das

[JohnfromUK]

19 minutes ago, oowee said:

They will demand high standards for market access. 

The 'high' standards are actually usually no 'higher' than other countries accept - just different.  Their main purpose is to ensure that open competition is stifled.

It is a bit like our telephone system as it was operated by the Post Office (GPO) before privatisation;

• It was grossly inefficient
• It was 'closed' in that you could only have a line or any apparatus supplied by the GPO and 'rented' very expensively
• Their system was antiquated using 'party lines' etc because there was no competition to keep then up to date
• There was along wait for new lines and facilities
• It was said that they had to do it to protect the 'quality of service'

When it was privatised - suddenly you could buy your own phone, get your line from other suppliers.  The cost of calls, apparatus etc. fell dra=maticall - and the new 'privatised' company, BT has prospered.

5 minutes ago, das said:

Yes, I will pay a higher green fee as a visitor, but then I can choose to play as I feel, when I want. But, I won't be paying a £1000 + membership subscription. IE I am free from the tie of the club.   What the golf club choose to make as a markup on beer, food and other incidentals is entirely up to them. They will soon find out if their prices are too high. As far as green fee prices go, check your nearest golf club, all fees will be online. As far as non member surcharges go, never heard of them in my 30 years of golf.

I've never played golf in my life so I have no experience of that, but my point is that they will ensure if you are not paying 'membership', they get their 'pound of flesh' and more in other ways.  It is about protecting themselves and their 'cosy protected market'.

[oowee]

9 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

The 'high' standards are actually usually no 'higher' than other countries accept - just different.  Their main purpose is to ensure that open competition is stifled.

It is a bit like our telephone system as it was operated by the Post Office (GPO) before privatisation;

• It was grossly inefficient
• It was 'closed' in that you could only have a line or any apparatus supplied by the GPO and 'rented' very expensively
• Their system was antiquated using 'party lines' etc because there was no competition to keep then up to date
• There was along wait for new lines and facilities
• It was said that they had to do it to protect the 'quality of service'

When it was privatised - suddenly you could buy your own phone, get your line from other suppliers.  The cost of calls, apparatus etc. fell dra=maticall - and the new 'privatised' company, BT has prospered.

I've never played golf in my life so I have no experience of that, but my point is that they will ensure if you are not paying 'membership', they get their 'pound of flesh' and more in other ways.  It is about protecting themselves and their 'cosy protected market'.

Nothing like the same. The protected market is one that we have created. The UK has been instrumental in setting many of the standards now adopted across the EU. It is a  protected market that works in our interest. The standards here are different than the rest of the world which is mostly lagging way behind what we have created in Europe. 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, oowee said:

The standards here are different than the rest of the world which is mostly lagging way behind what we have created in Europe.

The standards in Europe have been set primarily to stifle competition.  There are of course good reasons, but lets not dress it up as something it isn't - It is done to create a closed market.

[oowee]

Just now, JohnfromUK said:

The standards in Europe have been set primarily to stifle competition.  There are of course good reasons, but lets not dress it up as something it isn't - It is done to create a closed market.

Yes because the EU does not want to and is unable to compete on price without sacrificing the living standards that we have.  Europe wants to have the high standards of a developed economy as does most of the residents of the UK. I don't want to have the standards of the Yanks or china India or anywhere else.

[JohnfromUK]

15 minutes ago, oowee said:

Yes because the EU does not want to and is unable to compete on price without sacrificing the living standards that we have.  Europe wants to have the high standards of a developed economy as does most of the residents of the UK. I don't want to have the standards of the Yanks or china India or anywhere else.

Actually Europe is protecting a low efficiency, low productivity and vastly over bureaucratic and regulated fantasy land.

It is a fools paradise to shut out the rest of the world and try to pretend they don't do things much better and much more efficiently.

[oowee]

2 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

Actually Europe is protecting a low efficiency, low productivity and vastly over bureaucratic and regulated fantasy land.

It is a fools paradise to shut out the rest of the world and try to pretend they don't do things much better and much more efficiently.

Who is pretending? There are inefficiencies but its the regulation that pushes the standards that we all enjoy. In many ways the EU leads the world, environmental standards, food standards, health and hygien, animal welfare, workers rights, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, the rule of law, access to education, pollution control.  

Fantasy land 🤣 It is real, very real.

What would you do away with? 

 

[Gordon R]

Quote

freedom of the press, freedom of speech, the rule of law,

Just what has the EU to do with press freedom and freedom of speech?

The rule of law is something they are responsible for - Germany, Sweden and France are great examples. No increased crime or riots in any of those. Your point is well made. 😉