comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 11 minutes ago
Hard brexit is just the brexit people voted for, soft brexit is staying in the EU by the back door, still in the single market so everything is the same. What do people mean when they say we need to listen to the 16m who voted remain, we can't stay in and leave at the same time?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect this is complete and utter nonsense.

The ballot paper offered a binary choice, to a multifaceted question.

Farage, Gove, Douglas Carswell, Johnston, IDS, Dan Hannan, IDS, Giselle Stewart, all, (at various stages of the campaign) stated, or implied the UK would remain in the SM. It was even on some Leave.eu literature.

Where on the ballot paper did it state the UK would be leaving various other EU bodies, (Euratom a high profile example) that are not related to EU membership?

Do you honestly agree the government approach of “Brexit at any cost” is in the countries best interests, and if so, what benefit do you believe this will bring?

comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 15 minutes ago
Hard brexit is just the brexit people voted for, soft brexit is staying in the EU by the back door, still in the single market so everything is the same. What do people mean when they say we need to listen to the 16m who voted remain, we can't stay in and leave at the same time?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So let's assume the PM goes for a hard Brexit.
What is next then?

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/15121993.Is_BMW_shifting_new_Mini_production_to_Germany_/
===============
But all is good, isn't it? Let's go for a hard brexit.

comment by Planète des Singes - "..we will conquer the ball..! "🎬🚀🌎💣🎇🙈🙉🙊🌏🗽 (U4158)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 52 minutes ago
comment by Planète des Singes - "..we will conquer the ball..! "🎬🚀🌎💣🎇🙈🙉🙊🌏🗽 (U4158)
posted 9 hours, 11 minutes ago
Nothing that wasn't known before any referendum was called.

Going over old ground serves no purpose now.

That time has passed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is literally all you read from stubborn pro-Brexit folk, when they briefly raise their head from the sand. I've not seen a single comment to actually argue why the more gloomy comments in this thread are wrong, just people blindly saying it's wrong.

Ah well, fingers crossed, eh.

=============================

Pro-Brexit???? Not entirely correct.

Glad to put you right.

Far from my head being in the sand, as an historian, I take a broader view of the whole situation we've found ourselves in thanks, mainly, to political party's in-fighting & the decision by an ex-PM to address it. And failing.

The whole things are complete mess.

What's going to happen next is perpetually fascinating.

We're living through a period of great social change, on a global scale. The UK's relationship with it's EU partners was always going to reach a point where something had to give.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't just keep adding words in the hope that what you're saying carries more weight. I don't think anyone has failed to appreciate the gravity of current events.

seriously do you really think people voted leave to stay in the single market, keep freedom of movement and have everything the same Why did we have debates about immigraiton if we were going to keep freedom of movement? Why was there warnings about the economy if we were staying in the single market?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MaYV778kgU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNnh-KhiLm0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fDn0MvcHQ4

It was clear to everyone leaving meant leaving the SM. It's not brexit at any cost, the only way to properly leave the EU is to leave the single market. anything else would be basically staying in, without the other benefits being a full member of the EU brings so what's the point of that.

It would seem we're going to end up paying into it, without the benefits, whatever happens. So you're right, we should make sure we get absolutely zero benefit for our payments.

comment by Sell Ramsey and Wilshere. Buy Verratti and Rabiot. #Simple (U10012)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by 8bit (U2653)
posted 15 minutes ago
Hard brexit is just the brexit people voted for, soft brexit is staying in the EU by the back door, still in the single market so everything is the same. What do people mean when they say we need to listen to the 16m who voted remain, we can't stay in and leave at the same time?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So let's assume the PM goes for a hard Brexit.
What is next then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Negotiate new terms with the EU and then run the country ourselves like everyone else around the world manages to do. Just because we're not in a political union doesn't mean we can't have allies and trade and get on with other countries. of course there's uncertainty and risks because nobody ever left the EU before, but equally no risk = no rewards.

What rewards do you anticipate?

Genuine question, I'd appreciate some genuine positive input.

8bit

Do you accept that people are entitled to be concerned at the sheer size of the costs of leaving the SM?

The biggest political union and largest commercial bloc in the planet. One which provides UK industry with a host of protections at WTO level, (WTO tariff quotas for example) and Geographical Indications (GI’s) which cannot be renegotiated or replicated for third parties (which the UK will be outside of the SM).

And if so, do you know what the alternative is to the SM, and the UK’s WTO requirements?

comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Planète des Singes - "..we will conquer the ball..! "🎬🚀🌎💣🎇🙈🙉🙊🌏🗽 (U4158)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 52 minutes ago
comment by Planète des Singes - "..we will conquer the ball..! "🎬🚀🌎💣🎇🙈🙉🙊🌏🗽 (U4158)
posted 9 hours, 11 minutes ago
Nothing that wasn't known before any referendum was called.

Going over old ground serves no purpose now.

That time has passed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is literally all you read from stubborn pro-Brexit folk, when they briefly raise their head from the sand. I've not seen a single comment to actually argue why the more gloomy comments in this thread are wrong, just people blindly saying it's wrong.

Ah well, fingers crossed, eh.

=============================

Pro-Brexit???? Not entirely correct.

Glad to put you right.

Far from my head being in the sand, as an historian, I take a broader view of the whole situation we've found ourselves in thanks, mainly, to political party's in-fighting & the decision by an ex-PM to address it. And failing.

The whole things are complete mess.

What's going to happen next is perpetually fascinating.

We're living through a period of great social change, on a global scale. The UK's relationship with it's EU partners was always going to reach a point where something had to give.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't just keep adding words in the hope that what you're saying carries more weight. I don't think anyone has failed to appreciate the gravity of current events.
=========================================

So what are you saying now exactly? Are you agreeing with my previous comment or still regard me - incorrectly - as a head in the sand, pro-Brexit prole?

I seek no validation to my point of view on this either.

Blinkered thinking and entrenched positions have hampered political debate on this subject for decades. Gradual reform should have been the aim but, as we have seen, this proved ultimately fruitless so we have ended up in the position we are in now.

The objective now should be to get the best terms of exit possible. Who really knows how it will fall??

That's the fascination but we could all end up suffering for decades.

For the record, I didn't call you pro-brexit or head in the sand. I said, correctly, that what you wrote about "going over old ground, etc." is all we see from pro-brexit, hand in the sand types. Which I stand by, 8bit is showing it here - people keep saying stop talking about the arguments from last year whilst going on about the arguments from last year. It's dull.

Oh, and I was saying you were waffling - which is something we're all guilty of from time to time. I know I do it on here, often towards the end of the working day.

There's pros and cons to leaving and staying, we'll be out of the single market but we can trade more with the rest of the world. I'm not expecting leaving to solve all our problems, it's a more general thing of self determination and running the country in our own best interests, instead of us and 27 others and a lot of countries in different stages of development to us. And the whole bureaucracy of needing 28 countries to agree on everything so nothing really ever gets done. I just look at the whole EU over the last few years and the common problems every country is having, it's going downhill and I see more countries leaving. I think we've got out at the right time.

So, we can trade with the rest of the world, which we already could and we can run our own country, which we alreay did? You must have more than that?

Speeding up bureaucracy, I'll buy that one - but I've no doubt we're capable of slowing it right down again on our own - just look at how long it takes to write a single sheet of paper for the biggest poilitical event in a generation.

WWSPD I get why people are concerned, I'm not saying people who voted remain should change their minds but what should we do? Either we leave ot stay and the majority voted leave. The world around us is changing and we need to change with it, rising opposition to globalisation, and a move towards self determinationbut the EU doesn't want to adapt.

Henry's Cat.

So I'm not one of those, "stubborn pro-Brexit folk, when they briefly raise their head from the sand.." you referred to in your response to my post then?

My comment that prompted you to post in response "This is literally all you read....." etc..

Thanks for clarifying that.



One person's considered opinion is another's waffle.

That's fine. Everyone is entitled to their own interpretation.

Was John Major just waffling then???

One argument surrounded ‘unshackling’ the UK from EU bureaucracy. Gaining sovereignty.

The government therefore intends to leave both the SM and Customs Union. Thus discharging the UK from the authority of the ECJ. Despite Parliament at no stage being prevented from passing a single law because of the ECJ.

The folk pushing for a ‘hard Brexit’ are seemingly unware that the majority of EU directives come from 'codex alimentarius'.

Which are a set of universally agreed trading standards implemented by the WTO. The EU simply copy and paste these texts/instruments into EU law.

Post Brexit the UK will still have to implement these rules, as well as EU conformity regulations without having any, (at EU level) say in them, and nominal influence at the WTO. Less control. Less sovereignty.

With any trade body, an arbitrary structure is required. Which is used to settle/adjudicate trade disputes. Post Brexit the UK will therefore (when member renegotiation is complete) fall under the jurisdiction of WTO dispute settlement scheme.

The WTO system is considerably more bureaucratic, and cumbersome than the ECJ.

Which incidentally is why Trump is against free trade. He pulled the US out of TTP not because he thought it was a “bad deal” but because he opposes the WTO dispute system. Which allows companies to raise complaints against governments, and vice versa.

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_e.htm

The WTO system benefits the larger trading nation. And rather than face trade sanctions, or lesser trade revenue, smaller countries pretty much have to cede to the larger nations requirements.

As part of the largest trading bloc in the planet the UK have been on a sure footing, (the EU is a WTO member in its own right). In isolation, the UK’s influence will be considerably weaker. Less control. Less sovereignty.

The UK are essentially replacing EU bureaucracy (28 members) with the WTO (circa 163 members) and are paying billions for the privilege.

"So I'm not one of those, "stubborn pro-Brexit folk, when they briefly raise their head from the sand.." you referred to in your response to my post then?"

I've got no idea. But what you wrote is. I can't base my opinion of you on that.

But I do know you waffle, seriously, go back and read the comment that prompted me to say that and tell me you couldn't have said that in a single sentence.

"Was John Major just waffling then???"

Not sure, haven't heard/read the entire speech, but more than likely. Kind of comes with the job in his case though.

comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 6 minutes ago
"So I'm not one of those, "stubborn pro-Brexit folk, when they briefly raise their head from the sand.." you referred to in your response to my post then?"

I've got no idea. But what you wrote is. I can't base my opinion of you on that.

But I do know you waffle, seriously, go back and read the comment that prompted me to say that and tell me you couldn't have said that in a single sentence.

"Was John Major just waffling then???"

Not sure, haven't heard/read the entire speech, but more than likely. Kind of comes with the job in his case though.

=================================

So. You have no idea why you made this association other than interpreting it the way you did.

Classic.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by HenrysCat (U3608)
posted 27 minutes ago
So, we can trade with the rest of the world, which we already could and we can run our own country, which we alreay did? You must have more than that?

Speeding up bureaucracy, I'll buy that one - but I've no doubt we're capable of slowing it right down again on our own - just look at how long it takes to write a single sheet of paper for the biggest poilitical event in a generation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We just have the illusion of running our own country, in the rest of Europe and the west globalisation means outsourcing of jobs, stagnant wages, high levels of immigration, rising inequality and social problems while everyone sees the corruption at the top. Some countries have left wing governments and others have right wing but nothing changes, so people will vote for the outsiders.

comment by Just Shoot (U10408)
posted 11 minutes ago
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/23/complaining-brexit-economic-benefits-government-cost-of-living-multinationals

Amongst all the doom and gloom post Brexit...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the source (Guardian – a pro remain paper) I have a feeling this story is simply click bait to antagonise their readership.

Longworth was forced to resign from the UK chamber of commerce last year as his pro-Brexit sentiments were detrimental to the chamber’s neutrality.

In regard to his article, the first thing I noticed was his assertion that the UK can renegotiate trade tariffs. This is untrue.

The EU’s trade tariffs are enshrined by treaties at the WTO. Nations have not amended tariffs for years, as any alteration kicks off trade disputes.

If the UK were to alter its trading schedules with the EU, it would face a multitude of complaints from other nations across the globe.

In short, it’s extremely unlikely the UK would even consider what Longthorn is proposing.

Comment deleted by Site Moderator