BREXIT

[Yellow Bear]

1 hour ago, Raja Clavata said:

What a strange line of reasoning. Doesn't answer the question though does it and we are not debating the remain scenarios, should we conclude you don't answer the question because you can't?

Correct,  and neither can you - we were given 2 choices go or stay with no other caveats.  We are not debating remain scenarios because non were given as with leave none were given.  If you want to discuss 1 you have to discuss both - an issue that is totally ignored by the remain contingent.

 

[Rewulf]

50 minutes ago, Newbie to this said:

But we should be debating the remain scenarios. Will the UK be forced to accept the Euro as our currency? Will we be forced into a single EU Taxation policy? Will our contributions go up? Will Turkey or any other countries for that matter join and become recipient members? 

The list goes on, remaining is full of uncertainty!!! All of which we as the populace of the UK will have very little say on, especially with the veto being rumoured to be disappearing, which is yet another uncertainty!

This . Or the lack of this exposes how the establishment used to see the whole situation.
We never, ever got to vote on political or fiscal union.
We never got to vote on handing over sovereignty of law.

Some often mention the 1975 referendum and its 'overwhelming' support for 'remaining'
But the EU was a completely different animal back then, no Euro , no 4 freedoms, and you know why ? Because we didnt need them.

So the remain option question is perfectly askable, what type of remain should there be ?
Do we accept closer union, combined security (army) the Euro ?

You can bet your bottom dollar these things will come to pass if we stay, just like the metamorphosis that happened after 1975.

Edited September 27, 2019 by Rewulf

[SpringDon]

2 hours ago, Retsdon said:

<snip>

What's the point of the Single Market if it doesn't bring benefit to its members? And if we accept that it brings benefit - which by all objective standards it does - then logic says that being locked out of it will bring the opposite. It's obvious when you think about it. 

Does the single market bring the same level benefit to all its members? And should the benefit level vary, is it possible that some members might do better outside that market? It would be a remarkably rare structure if everybody wins, obviously.

[Retsdon]

17 minutes ago, SpringDon said:

Does the single market bring the same level benefit to all its members? And should the benefit level vary, is it possible that some members might do better outside that market? It would be a remarkably rare structure if everybody wins, obviously.

Here you go. https://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/fileadmin/files/BSt/Publikationen/GrauePublikationen/EZ_Study_SingleMarket.pdf

[Dave-G]

3 hours ago, henry d said:

There is already a panic over medication and medical supplies such as dressings and even rubber gloves, so yes I can, and so can others. How many sauces that are on the supermarket shelves rely on tomatoes? The UK does a few toms for the market but can't supply that size of market. 

Without a deal we will see problems with foodstuffs deteriorating in the back of lorries, demand will outstrip supply and I would not be surprised if we saw some looting or civil disobedience around food as the poorest cannot afford to stock up and tend to live hand to mouth.

Anyone can see some distance into the future and hopefully there will be some sort of deal and we can avoid the above.

My sister has a nursery in Cornwall with several very large greenhouses. She does very good local trade but her wider potential market has been heavily compromised by cheaper toms from the EU that were grown with the help of subsidies. The same issue applies to others throughout the horticultural industry. Those stifled by subsidised EU grown foodstuff  would be able to resume their ability to produce food for our own people. 

 

This looks to my tiny mind that EU looks after their farmers at the expense of ours - a similar story to what has been gnawing away at a lot of other UK industrial ability to support itself.

[Raja Clavata]

2 hours ago, Yellow Bear said:

Correct,  and neither can you - we were given 2 choices go or stay with no other caveats.  We are not debating remain scenarios because non were given as with leave none were given.  If you want to discuss 1 you have to discuss both - an issue that is totally ignored by the remain contingent.

 

I do not concur. The time for debating the scenarios was prior to the referendum vote - reinforces the view that the referendum was not executed properly - but that's in the past now. Remain scenarios only become relevant if we drop Brexit.

[Retsdon]

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-barnier/eu-awaits-legal-and-operational-brexit-ideas-from-uk-barnier-idUSKBN1WB0OE

Philippe Lamberts, a liberal EU lawmaker from Belgium, spared Johnson no criticism as he arrived for the meeting with Barnier.

“He’s not seeking a solution because a solution would mean first finding a compromise with the European Union, then building compromise in Westminster (the UK parliament) to pass an agreement,” Lamberts told reporters.

“So maybe his strategy is another one and I believe it has been all along ... to provoke a no-deal Brexit but in a way that would allow him to blame others - either Brussels or Westminster.”

I would say that Lamberts is 100% correct. And I'm also predicting that the next step after Britain crashes out of the EU will be to try and flog the British public a US trade deal containing the sort of asymmetrical terms that Central American countries are only too familiar with. There'll be an awful lot of money to be made from financing and organizing what will amount to a fire sale of UK public assets, and if the British public get screwed, so what? IBGYBG as the hedge fund managers and City boys are wont to say. 

[Rewulf]

23 minutes ago, Raja Clavata said:

I do not concur. The time for debating the scenarios was prior to the referendum vote - reinforces the view that the referendum was not executed properly - but that's in the past now. Remain scenarios only become relevant if we drop Brexit.

Really ?

Its funny how we seem to be force fed a diet of apocalyptic leave scenarios for the past three and a half years with absolutely no let up.
I thought a few remain ones to balance things out are in order ?

Especially seeing as over half of parliament seem intent on revoking Brexit ASAP,  should we not examine the alternatives ?

Having said that, the remain position has shifted somewhat from how bad Brexit will be , to how terrible and illegal the government is behaving while trying to deliver it !
When asked direct questions about how they will support another vote, with strict options , or even the prospect of their stance come a GE , its 'Errr well... we support democracy, but we dont support leaving with no deal , so we cant the government..... We support the peoples will to leave , but we wont support an option where we leave the single market or customs union..'

And other such B.S.

Tell it how it is remainers, YOU DONT SUPPORT LEAVING, AND YOU DONT RESPECT THE VOTE.
So be damned to the majority, and be damned to democracy.

[Rewulf]

4 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

“So maybe his strategy is another one and I believe it has been all along ... to provoke a no-deal Brexit but in a way that would allow him to blame others - either Brussels or Westminster.”

You could easily level the same accusation at Brussels, could you not.

What about them coming up with a alternative solution..?
Oh forgot, its up to the UK to propose a solution, because THEY wanted to leave?

But is it not a mutual problem?
Are we negotiating , or just being told what is acceptable to THEM , and all they have to say is 'Nothing is acceptable' so you best stay.

No deal is the only bargaining chip, and it seems the only solution to the problem of an intractible bloc.

[Retsdon]

1 minute ago, Rewulf said:

Oh forgot, its up to the UK to propose a solution, because THEY wanted to leave?

Of course. Why would it be otherwise? It's up to Britain to say what it wants. But we come back to the major issue which is that what Britain wants is unavailable. Not that we weren't warned, mark you. Here was the German finance minister back in 2016 - https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/10/no-single-market-access-for-uk-after-brexit-wolfgang-schauble-says . And what was the response? 

Iain Duncan Smith, the former work and pensions secretary, said of Schäuble’s comments: “To quote Mandy Rice-Davis, he would say that, wouldn’t he? … What I call the realpolitik underneath the surface is that they don’t want to get into spats. Of course they don’t. We’re a friend, we cooperate in Nato, the G8 and G20. Mr Schauble’s bound to say what he said. Come on. Don’t tell me that Mr Osborne hasn’t been on that line to him almost permanently for the last few weeks …

“You’ll probably get a load of these statements. Every finance minister in Europe is going to line up. They’ve probably got them every day between now and the referendum.”

No, Iain, you bl***y cretin, Schauble wasn't lying. He was simply explaining how the Single Market works. But you were too stupid to understand him.

And so here we are.

[oowee]

2 hours ago, SpringDon said:

Does the single market bring the same level benefit to all its members? And should the benefit level vary, is it possible that some members might do better outside that market? It would be a remarkably rare structure if everybody wins, obviously.

So you can see the countries at the core of the EU benefit to the tune of 3600 euro's per capita and those on the periphery 160 euro's per capita with an average of 840 euro's per capita. On the whole the study found higher welfare, higher productivity and lower mark up  and countries outside are slightly worse off because of the single market. 

2 hours ago, Dave-G said:

My sister has a nursery in Cornwall with several very large greenhouses. She does very good local trade but her wider potential market has been heavily compromised by cheaper toms from the EU that were grown with the help of subsidies. The same issue applies to others throughout the horticultural industry. Those stifled by subsidised EU grown foodstuff  would be able to resume their ability to produce food for our own people. 

What subsidy would that be? Does she can her tomatoes the area of industry that may have some EU 

subsidy? 

Either way she should keep at it. Post Brexit Tomato prices will be subject to a 14% tariff. 

Edited September 27, 2019 by oowee

[Raja Clavata]

32 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Really ?

Yes

Its funny how we seem to be force fed a diet of apocalyptic leave scenarios for the past three and a half years with absolutely no let up.
I thought a few remain ones to balance things out are in order ?

Especially seeing as over half of parliament seem intent on revoking Brexit ASAP,  should we not examine the alternatives ?

Happy to do that once no deal end of October is off the table or a second referendum is called, otherwise it's just diversionary tactics.

Having said that, the remain position has shifted somewhat from how bad Brexit will be , to how terrible and illegal the government is behaving while trying to deliver it !
When asked direct questions about how they will support another vote, with strict options , or even the prospect of their stance come a GE , its 'Errr well... we support democracy, but we dont support leaving with no deal , so we cant the government..... We support the peoples will to leave , but we wont support an option where we leave the single market or customs union..'

There has been no shift in position, the current focus is in blocking the govt taking us out on 31st October. simple as that.

And other such B.S.

Tell it how it is remainers, YOU DONT SUPPORT LEAVING, AND YOU DONT RESPECT THE VOTE.
So be damned to the majority, and be damned to democracy.

Your words not mine / ours.

 

[Mice!]

5 hours ago, henry d said:

 There is already a panic over medication and medical supplies such as dressings and even rubber gloves, so yes I can, and so can others. How many sauces that are on the supermarket shelves rely on tomatoes? The UK does a few toms for the market but can't supply that size of market. 

Without a deal we will see problems with foodstuffs deteriorating in the back of lorries, demand will outstrip supply and I would not be surprised if we saw some looting or civil disobedience around food as the poorest cannot afford to stock up and tend to live hand to mouth.

Anyone can see some distance into the future and hopefully there will be some sort of deal and we can avoid the above.

sorry Henry but none of that stacks up, we can make medication ourselves but do it elsewhere as it's cheaper.

Sauce on the shelves? That's not really a concern, we already get veg on shelves from India and Africa which baffles me so stuff sitting in a refrigerated arctic isn't a concern.

And the idea of looting and civil disobedience over food? The poorest already eat badly choosing the cheapest foods and are apparently already eating hand to mouth, or going to food banks according to the media.

[Rewulf]

8 minutes ago, Retsdon said:

Of course. Why would it be otherwise? It's up to Britain to say what it wants. But we come back to the major issue which is that what Britain wants is unavailable.

The EU know exactly what Britain wants, so why do they have to ask for it ?

To say its 'unavailable' is carrot on stick style negotiating, and again a load of old horse manure.
If we said to the EU , heres £50 billion a year for access to the single market ect , but without the other aspects of the 4 freedoms, do you think they would say no ?

What was the £ 40 billion WA sweetener for ? The carrot was single market access , or a trade deal that simulated it... at Im sure you can imagine, a cost.

The problem is , the EU got greedy, and their plans are disrupted by Brexit, so their WA proposals were made deliberately un workable.

What Britain wants from the EU , deal wise , IS unavailable, while the threat of us just walking away is removed from our arsenal.
The remainer element in parliament, and you CAN call them traitors for this, expects the Boris government to attempt to negotiate a better deal, whilst hamstrung, from a bloc that refuses to re negotiate a completely unratified deal from the previous administration.
And they do this with the express intention of stopping Brexit entirely, whilst pretending to still support the vote !

They should have their legitimacy to be MPs questioned by the supreme court, and if found wanting, removed from office, and by elections called.
Far fetched ?
Pandoras box..

[Retsdon]

Just now, Rewulf said:

If we said to the EU , heres £50 billion a year for access to the single market ect , but without the other aspects of the 4 freedoms, do you think they would say no ?

Yes. Absolutely.

[Rewulf]

Just now, Retsdon said:

Yes. Absolutely.

Dont be ridiculous , they would turn down 40 % of their entire budget !

That rule book would be re written quick time 

[henry d]

3 minutes ago, Mice! said:

And the idea of looting and civil disobedience over food? The poorest already eat badly choosing economically forced to eat the cheapest foods and are apparently already eating hand to mouth, or going to food banks according to the media.

Sorted

[Retsdon]

2 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

Dont be ridiculous , they would turn down 40 % of their entire budget !

That rule book would be re written quick time 

Read up about The French Indemnity.

[Mice!]

1 hour ago, Raja Clavata said:

I do not concur. The time for debating the scenarios was prior to the referendum vote - reinforces the view that the referendum was not executed properly - but that's in the past now. Remain scenarios only become relevant if we drop Brexit.

Can't agree with this, what if the Euro was forced on us? More interfering from the EU. There hasn't been much if any talk of what could happen if we were forced to remain.

Just talk of how bad things will be if we leave.

[Raja Clavata]

4 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

They should have their legitimacy to be MPs questioned by the supreme court, and if found wanting, removed from office, and by elections called.
Far fetched ?
Pandoras box..

Not with taxpayers money please.

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, henry d said:

Sorted

I know right , they are so thin , and cant even afford the new iphone 11 innit 

1 minute ago, Raja Clavata said:

Not with taxpayers money please.

Why , who paid for the prorogation case 

[Raja Clavata]

Just now, Mice! said:

Can't agree with this, what if the Euro was forced on us? More interfering from the EU. There hasn't been much if any talk of what could happen if we were forced to remain.

Just talk of how bad things will be if we leave.

I stated previously that something like forcing the Euro on us would be valid grounds for considering leaving.

Rumours about the removal of the veto are not adequate grounds in my opinion.

[Rewulf]

1 minute ago, Raja Clavata said:

I stated previously that something like forcing the Euro on us would be valid grounds for considering leaving.

Rumours about the removal of the veto are not adequate grounds in my opinion.

Same as anything with the EU , slowly slowly catchee monkey..

[Newbie to this]

1 minute ago, Raja Clavata said:

I stated previously that something like forcing the Euro on us would be valid grounds for considering leaving.

Rumours about the removal of the veto are not adequate grounds in my opinion.

But removal of the veto would be the foundations for forcing such things like the single currency on those that do not wish it.

[oowee]

5 minutes ago, Rewulf said:

What Britain wants from the EU , deal wise , IS unavailable, while the threat of us just walking away is removed from our arsenal.

 It's not a real option if it makes us so much worse off and the EU know it. They can simply let us go no deal and wait till we return impoverished.