FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > What the other Brexit half thinks
What the other Brexit half thinks
Jump to: Newest in thread
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/12/16/why-other-half-vote/ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's strange if they voted based upon sovereignty that that have been so vocally against parliamentary sovereignty, the British judiciary and the British civil service, basically so against the British constitution." Rubbish it is completely the opposite,yes you read well but do not try understand people. I am very much in favour of these things and therefore against European laws etc. We do not try to undermine the government as you do | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's strange if they voted based upon sovereignty that that have been so vocally against parliamentary sovereignty, the British judiciary and the British civil service, basically so against the British constitution.Rubbish it is completely the opposite,yes you read well but do not try understand people. I am very much in favour of these things and therefore against European laws etc. We do not try to undermine the government as you do" Do you believe that parliament should have a say on what we hope to achieve in the negotiations? That parliament needs to give authority for article 50 to be triggered? Do you believe that parliament should get a vote on the final Brexit deal, just as the European Parliament will get? Do you believe that it is right for British judges sitting in a British court should rule on British laws, such as the powers of the PM? Do you believe that British civil servants should be appointed based upon their professional experience and competence, rather than their political beliefs? And that it is their duty to tell truth to power? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's strange if they voted based upon sovereignty that that have been so vocally against parliamentary sovereignty, the British judiciary and the British civil service, basically so against the British constitution." Perhaps just the vocal ones? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Rubbish it is completely the opposite,yes you read well but do not try understand people. I am very much in favour of these things and therefore against European laws etc. We do not try to undermine the government as you do" This is your take though. You can't assume to what extent that's true of all leave voters. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's strange if they voted based upon sovereignty that that have been so vocally against parliamentary sovereignty, the British judiciary and the British civil service, basically so against the British constitution." Brexiters just want the referendum result to be respected and for Brexit to be implemented. The vote is done now let's just get on with the job of leaving. What I find strange now is people like Gina Miller who brought this court case saying parliamentary sovereignty must be respected when people like her wanted to keep us in the overbearing EU which would ultimately destroy parliamentary sovereignty and parliamentary democracy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Brexiters just want the referendum result to be respected and for Brexit to be implemented. The vote is done now let's just get on with the job of leaving. What I find strange now is people like Gina Miller who brought this court case saying parliamentary sovereignty must be respected when people like her wanted to keep us in the overbearing EU which would ultimately destroy parliamentary sovereignty and parliamentary democracy. " So are you making any effort to see another view there do you think? In leaving should 48% of voters be considered in the nature of how we leave Europe? Is there any merit in the Supreme Court case? Do you think Parliament should be sovereign in this matter? Bear in mind that the government was not elected on a manifesto which provided a policy on the nature of leaving the EU? These are direct questions, unambiguous questions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Brexiters just want the referendum result to be respected and for Brexit to be implemented. The vote is done now let's just get on with the job of leaving. What I find strange now is people like Gina Miller who brought this court case saying parliamentary sovereignty must be respected when people like her wanted to keep us in the overbearing EU which would ultimately destroy parliamentary sovereignty and parliamentary democracy. So are you making any effort to see another view there do you think? In leaving should 48% of voters be considered in the nature of how we leave Europe? Is there any merit in the Supreme Court case? Do you think Parliament should be sovereign in this matter? Bear in mind that the government was not elected on a manifesto which provided a policy on the nature of leaving the EU? These are direct questions, unambiguous questions. " 48% is less than 52% so obviously the priority is to give the winning 52% the Lions share of what they want moving forwards. Parliament will be sovereign in this matter, Teresa May will be putting her Brexit plan before parliament to vote on. Parliament has already been involved and voted on article 50 in December. The government is committed now to keeping parliament involved. What exactly is your problem? We had a referendum with 2 distinct campaigns officially designated by the electoral commission. Both sides Remain and Leave laid out their vision of what should happen moving forward after the referendum result. Leave won by 52% so the government will take pointers from the official vote leave campaign on how to move forward. It's being reported now Teresa May will announce on Tuesday we will leave the single market, we will leave the customs union and we will leave the European Court of justice jurisdiction. This is what vote leave campaigned for to take back control of our borders and immigration, take back control of our laws, take back our ability to do our own bilateral trade deals and stop payment of EU contribution fees. Brexit is happening, we are leaving, you Remainers that are still in denial really need to get over it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" 48% is less than 52% so obviously the priority is to give the winning 52% the Lions share of what they want moving forwards. Parliament will be sovereign in this matter, Teresa May will be putting her Brexit plan before parliament to vote on. Parliament has already been involved and voted on article 50 in December. The government is committed now to keeping parliament involved. What exactly is your problem? We had a referendum with 2 distinct campaigns officially designated by the electoral commission. Both sides Remain and Leave laid out their vision of what should happen moving forward after the referendum result. Leave won by 52% so the government will take pointers from the official vote leave campaign on how to move forward. It's being reported now Teresa May will announce on Tuesday we will leave the single market, we will leave the customs union and we will leave the European Court of justice jurisdiction. This is what vote leave campaigned for to take back control of our borders and immigration, take back control of our laws, take back our ability to do our own bilateral trade deals and stop payment of EU contribution fees. Brexit is happening, we are leaving, you Remainers that are still in denial really need to get over it. " So I think we go back to the same point don't we? The question on the ballot paper has ONLY told us that 52% of voters want to leave the EU. Whatever your assertion there was no clear definition of leave. If you claim to know then that's as arrogant assumption as any of the "elites" make. Have a read through this. Leave means something different to everyone or do you believe otherwise? https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/08/18/majority-people-think-freedom-movement-fair-price-/ Also, different elements of the leave formula may be acceptable in isolation, but when there is a trade-off to be made the situation becomes far more complex: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/10/poll-public-will-not-accept-brexit-worse-off-tim-farron-ukip-lib-dem-yougov What is your suggestion for bringing the whole country along this road rather than imposing the will of what is a narrow majority. It must work better if more people can find something to get behind rather than just being told to do it. It is a big part of the leave argument that we shouldn't be just told by the EU what to do isn't it? Please stop talking loudly at me like I'm a Spanish waiter. Please try to acknowledge my concerns and allay them. Perhaps then I can be content? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" 48% is less than 52% so obviously the priority is to give the winning 52% the Lions share of what they want moving forwards. Parliament will be sovereign in this matter, Teresa May will be putting her Brexit plan before parliament to vote on. Parliament has already been involved and voted on article 50 in December. The government is committed now to keeping parliament involved. What exactly is your problem? We had a referendum with 2 distinct campaigns officially designated by the electoral commission. Both sides Remain and Leave laid out their vision of what should happen moving forward after the referendum result. Leave won by 52% so the government will take pointers from the official vote leave campaign on how to move forward. It's being reported now Teresa May will announce on Tuesday we will leave the single market, we will leave the customs union and we will leave the European Court of justice jurisdiction. This is what vote leave campaigned for to take back control of our borders and immigration, take back control of our laws, take back our ability to do our own bilateral trade deals and stop payment of EU contribution fees. Brexit is happening, we are leaving, you Remainers that are still in denial really need to get over it. So I think we go back to the same point don't we? The question on the ballot paper has ONLY told us that 52% of voters want to leave the EU. Whatever your assertion there was no clear definition of leave. If you claim to know then that's as arrogant assumption as any of the "elites" make. Have a read through this. Leave means something different to everyone or do you believe otherwise? https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/08/18/majority-people-think-freedom-movement-fair-price-/ Also, different elements of the leave formula may be acceptable in isolation, but when there is a trade-off to be made the situation becomes far more complex: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/10/poll-public-will-not-accept-brexit-worse-off-tim-farron-ukip-lib-dem-yougov What is your suggestion for bringing the whole country along this road rather than imposing the will of what is a narrow majority. It must work better if more people can find something to get behind rather than just being told to do it. It is a big part of the leave argument that we shouldn't be just told by the EU what to do isn't it? Please stop talking loudly at me like I'm a Spanish waiter. Please try to acknowledge my concerns and allay them. Perhaps then I can be content?" I've not used any exclamation marks or capital letters so I'm not sure why you think anyone is talking loudly? Anyway you and many other Remainers idea of leave seems to be very strange. Sounds like you want the UK to remain in the single market, remain in the customs union, remain in the European Court of justice and continue to pay EU contribution fees. In what possible way does that in any way constitute leaving the EU? In fact it still sounds like full membership of the EU to me. Leave means Leave and the EU have said we can't cherry pick parts of membership. We need a clean break from the EU and to achieve all the things the various vote leave campaigns campaigned on, it means leaving the single market, leaving the customs union, leaving the European Court of justice and stopping payment of EU contribution fees. This is being reported as the stance Teresa May is going to take and will set out in her speech tomorrow. If it is what she says tomorrow then as someone who voted leave I'll be very happy about it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" What is your suggestion for bringing the whole country along this road rather than imposing the will of what is a narrow majority. It must work better if more people can find something to get behind rather than just being told to do it. It is a big part of the leave argument that we shouldn't be just told by the EU what to do isn't it? Please stop talking loudly at me like I'm a Spanish waiter. Please try to acknowledge my concerns and allay them. Perhaps then I can be content? I've not used any exclamation marks or capital letters so I'm not sure why you think anyone is talking loudly? Anyway you and many other Remainers idea of leave seems to be very strange. Sounds like you want the UK to remain in the single market, remain in the customs union, remain in the European Court of justice and continue to pay EU contribution fees. In what possible way does that in any way constitute leaving the EU? In fact it still sounds like full membership of the EU to me. Leave means Leave and the EU have said we can't cherry pick parts of membership. We need a clean break from the EU and to achieve all the things the various vote leave campaigns campaigned on, it means leaving the single market, leaving the customs union, leaving the European Court of justice and stopping payment of EU contribution fees. This is being reported as the stance Teresa May is going to take and will set out in her speech tomorrow. If it is what she says tomorrow then as someone who voted leave I'll be very happy about it. " You also know what I think as well as what everyone voted leave thinks? Then you are absolutely correct. This will be easy. I feel so much better now that you've reassured me. You've taken me with you on a wave of optimism and clear explanation of how our lives will improved. Thank you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a remainer i think the 48% who voted remain should have no say in brexit. Its the responsibility of the leave campaign and of course the government to decide on hard or soft or whatevet brexit they want .That way the people and Members of parliament who voted out are responsible for the success or failure of brexit.Its their baby not mine. "That's not quite how democracy works. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a remainer i think the 48% who voted remain should have no say in brexit. Its the responsibility of the leave campaign and of course the government to decide on hard or soft or whatevet brexit they want .That way the people and Members of parliament who voted out are responsible for the success or failure of brexit.Its their baby not mine.
That's not quite how democracy works."...but we've just been told that it is | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"As a remainer i think the 48% who voted remain should have no say in brexit. Its the responsibility of the leave campaign and of course the government to decide on hard or soft or whatevet brexit they want .That way the people and Members of parliament who voted out are responsible for the success or failure of brexit.Its their baby not mine.
That's not quite how democracy works."Democracy doesnt really work anyway. Just the illusion of democracy.If remainers get involved then they'll be complicit in whatever happens next. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's not quite how democracy works. Democracy doesnt really work anyway. Just the illusion of democracy.If remainers get involved then they'll be complicit in whatever happens next. "I'd say quite the opposite, unless you are being sarcastic. "They came for the trade unionists and I said nothing..." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's strange if they voted based upon sovereignty that that have been so vocally against parliamentary sovereignty, the British judiciary and the British civil service, basically so against the British constitution.Rubbish it is completely the opposite,yes you read well but do not try understand people. I am very much in favour of these things and therefore against European laws etc. We do not try to undermine the government as you do Do you believe that parliament should have a say on what we hope to achieve in the negotiations? That parliament needs to give authority for article 50 to be triggered? Do you believe that parliament should get a vote on the final Brexit deal, just as the European Parliament will get? Do you believe that it is right for British judges sitting in a British court should rule on British laws, such as the powers of the PM? Do you believe that British civil servants should be appointed based upon their professional experience and competence, rather than their political beliefs? And that it is their duty to tell truth to power? " If parliament didn't want a Brexit then it should never have approved the referendum. It approved the referendum and the referendum voted to leave. Period. Full Stop. You lost get over it and yourself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If parliament didn't want a Brexit then it should never have approved the referendum. It approved the referendum and the referendum voted to leave. Period. Full Stop. You lost get over it and yourself." Constructive. Thank you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That's not quite how democracy works. Democracy doesnt really work anyway. Just the illusion of democracy.If remainers get involved then they'll be complicit in whatever happens next.
I'd say quite the opposite, unless you are being sarcastic.
"They came for the trade unionists and I said nothing...""Not being sarcastic.I would suggest we should make them responsible and accountable for the decisions they make on brexit .Remainers will try to water down brexit which makes you again complicit and open to accussations of being a reason for failure.Regarding standing up and being counted the democracy i am being told to stand up for is illusionary imho. .If you're involved then you are complicit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would suggest we should make them responsible and accountable for the decisions they make on brexit .Remainers will try to water down brexit which makes you again complicit and open to accussations of being a reason for failure.Regarding standing up and being counted the democracy i am being told to stand up for is illusionary imho. .If you're involved then you are complicit. "I totally agree with you on this. Let the revolutionaries have their revoluation and let them be accountable for its success or failure. I personally voted to remain because I cant possibly see how making free trade agreements with countries on the other side of the world whilst destroying trading relationships with our near neighbours is going to make us better off, it is simply illogical. That said, I do actually think it is for the Brexiters to carry their flag on the Crusade that they have embarked on and be prepared to live or die from the consequences without having any ability whatsoever to blame anyone if it goes wrong whilst at the same time earning all the rights and expectations to be complimented if it is a success. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I agree it is why i was happy to see Ms May appoint the chief mouthpieces for Brexit as being involved in negotiations It is there baby they shouted for it now let them sort it out ........and if it turns out to be a decision which leads to poorer living standards. less workers rights.well history will not judge them kindly..... "I find it very disconcerting that chief proponents of Brexit are so woefully ignorant on the subject though. I was listening to Gove being interviewed on the Today programme earlier and he was talking about a deal with the US. He said that obviously they couldn't sign the FTA until after we had left the EU, the interviewer then informed him that we couldn't even begin the negotiations with the US until after we had left the EU, and Gove just said that he wasn't a trade negotiator so he wouldn't know about that.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If parliament didn't want a Brexit then it should never have approved the referendum. It approved the referendum and the referendum voted to leave. Period. Full Stop. You lost get over it and yourself. Constructive. Thank you." And they didn't even answer the questions. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If parliament didn't want a Brexit then it should never have approved the referendum. It approved the referendum and the referendum voted to leave. Period. Full Stop. You lost get over it and yourself. Constructive. Thank you. And they didn't even answer the questions." Any comment on the economy yet? 
Thought not. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Any comment on the economy yet?
Thought not."No idea what relevance this has to the thread. What does this contribute? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Any comment on the economy yet?
Thought not.
No idea what relevance this has to the thread. What does this contribute?"Random  Anyway easy why not give them enough rope . | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Random Anyway easy why not give them enough rope ."I've actually been on these threads to try and understand how this might all work out well. How I might feel more comfortable with this. Not to just argue for the sake of it. Never any answers though. Any positivity or thoughtfulness about how this effects everyone. No acknowledgement that the exit process will require everyone to make it work. Just anger. Always anger. I'd genuinely like to know how my life will improve... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Random Anyway easy why not give them enough rope .
I've actually been on these threads to try and understand how this might all work out well. How I might feel more comfortable with this.
Not to just argue for the sake of it.
Never any answers though. Any positivity or thoughtfulness about how this effects everyone. No acknowledgement that the exit process will require everyone to make it work.
Just anger. Always anger.
I'd genuinely like to know how my life will improve..."stop worrying | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Random Anyway easy why not give them enough rope .
I've actually been on these threads to try and understand how this might all work out well. How I might feel more comfortable with this.
Not to just argue for the sake of it.
Never any answers though. Any positivity or thoughtfulness about how this effects everyone. No acknowledgement that the exit process will require everyone to make it work.
Just anger. Always anger.
I'd genuinely like to know how my life will improve..."No anger here. By the way, how did you perceive the future going if we had remained in the EU? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Random Anyway easy why not give them enough rope .
I've actually been on these threads to try and understand how this might all work out well. How I might feel more comfortable with this.
Not to just argue for the sake of it.
Never any answers though. Any positivity or thoughtfulness about how this effects everyone. No acknowledgement that the exit process will require everyone to make it work.
Just anger. Always anger.
I'd genuinely like to know how my life will improve..."It might not improve for you, it might for others.It is a subjective thing anyway .Live long and prosper and let the brexit crew get on with it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'd genuinely like to know how my life will improve... stop worrying" Also very enlightening. Pleased that you were able to provide me with such a comprehensive answer. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Random Anyway easy why not give them enough rope .
I've actually been on these threads to try and understand how this might all work out well. How I might feel more comfortable with this.
Not to just argue for the sake of it.
Never any answers though. Any positivity or thoughtfulness about how this effects everyone. No acknowledgement that the exit process will require everyone to make it work.
Just anger. Always anger.
I'd genuinely like to know how my life will improve..."It won't, but the revolutionary guards are flying the battle colours now and their Crusade is under way. Best just let them get on with it rather than try to water down their ideas and get blamed for the rest of your and their lives. They want trade with the EU to be completely dismantled and to stop immigration. Logic dictates that both of these policies will seriously reduce the UK Treasury income and by default make the country poorer. This is not even debatable, the country - and you will not be better off until we can increase ROW trade by 40%+ and we get another influx of migrants or a massive rise in the birth rate. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Random Anyway easy why not give them enough rope .
I've actually been on these threads to try and understand how this might all work out well. How I might feel more comfortable with this.
Not to just argue for the sake of it.
Never any answers though. Any positivity or thoughtfulness about how this effects everyone. No acknowledgement that the exit process will require everyone to make it work.
Just anger. Always anger.
I'd genuinely like to know how my life will improve...
It won't, but the revolutionary guards are flying the battle colours now and their Crusade is under way. Best just let them get on with it rather than try to water down their ideas and get blamed for the rest of your and their lives.
They want trade with the EU to be completely dismantled and to stop immigration. Logic dictates that both of these policies will seriously reduce the UK Treasury income and by default make the country poorer. This is not even debatable, the country - and you will not be better off until we can increase ROW trade by 40%+ and we get another influx of migrants or a massive rise in the birth rate."Who has said they want to stop trade with the EU? Or stop immigration? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Random Anyway easy why not give them enough rope .
I've actually been on these threads to try and understand how this might all work out well. How I might feel more comfortable with this.
Not to just argue for the sake of it.
Never any answers though. Any positivity or thoughtfulness about how this effects everyone. No acknowledgement that the exit process will require everyone to make it work.
Just anger. Always anger.
I'd genuinely like to know how my life will improve...
It won't, but the revolutionary guards are flying the battle colours now and their Crusade is under way. Best just let them get on with it rather than try to water down their ideas and get blamed for the rest of your and their lives.
They want trade with the EU to be completely dismantled and to stop immigration. Logic dictates that both of these policies will seriously reduce the UK Treasury income and by default make the country poorer. This is not even debatable, the country - and you will not be better off until we can increase ROW trade by 40%+ and we get another influx of migrants or a massive rise in the birth rate."Ah, the "they." Damn them. Eejits. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" No anger here. By the way, how did you perceive the future going if we had remained in the EU?" I live in one of the wealthiest, safest countries on the planet. Everyone who wants to get an education can. Everyone who needs medical care can get it. It's one of the fastest growing economies in the world. We are unduly influential in international affairs due to our strong position in one of the most powerful political and economic blocks on the planet. As far as I could see, other than EU immigration we were, as the UK completely I'm control of the policies that controlled all of these things. We were also able to continue to push for change within the EU, even if that was a slow and frustrating process. So, once again, rather than asking me what I think, which is an interesting rhetorical trick, how about telling me why give that up? What will replace it that's better? It can't be that difficult can it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" No anger here. By the way, how did you perceive the future going if we had remained in the EU? I live in one of the wealthiest, safest countries on the planet. Everyone who wants to get an education can. Everyone who needs medical care can get it. It's one of the fastest growing economies in the world. We are unduly influential in international affairs due to our strong position in one of the most powerful political and economic blocks on the planet. As far as I could see, other than EU immigration we were, as the UK completely I'm control of the policies that controlled all of these things. We were also able to continue to push for change within the EU, even if that was a slow and frustrating process. So, once again, rather than asking me what I think, which is an interesting rhetorical trick, how about telling me why give that up? What will replace it that's better? It can't be that difficult can it?" So, apart from immigration, we were completely in control of our security, economy, defense, and health. And one if the safest, richest, healthiest countries in the world. So the onlyvthing that possibly changes then is that we also will control immigration. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" No anger here. By the way, how did you perceive the future going if we had remained in the EU? I live in one of the wealthiest, safest countries on the planet. Everyone who wants to get an education can. Everyone who needs medical care can get it. It's one of the fastest growing economies in the world. We are unduly influential in international affairs due to our strong position in one of the most powerful political and economic blocks on the planet. As far as I could see, other than EU immigration we were, as the UK completely I'm control of the policies that controlled all of these things. We were also able to continue to push for change within the EU, even if that was a slow and frustrating process. So, once again, rather than asking me what I think, which is an interesting rhetorical trick, how about telling me why give that up? What will replace it that's better? It can't be that difficult can it?" It was no rhetorical trick. You ask where will we be when we exit the EU. I ask where would we be if we stayed in the EU. That can't be difficult, can it? The truth is that both outcomes are unknowns. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's strange if they voted based upon sovereignty that that have been so vocally against parliamentary sovereignty, the British judiciary and the British civil service, basically so against the British constitution.Rubbish it is completely the opposite,yes you read well but do not try understand people. I am very much in favour of these things and therefore against European laws etc. We do not try to undermine the government as you do Do you believe that parliament should have a say on what we hope to achieve in the negotiations? That parliament needs to give authority for article 50 to be triggered? Do you believe that parliament should get a vote on the final Brexit deal, just as the European Parliament will get? Do you believe that it is right for British judges sitting in a British court should rule on British laws, such as the powers of the PM? Do you believe that British civil servants should be appointed based upon their professional experience and competence, rather than their political beliefs? And that it is their duty to tell truth to power? " Possibly the most ridiculous post I have ever read. All of the institution's you mentioned, have the principles of democracy at their very heart. They are duty bound to ensure, The democratic process, is obeyed,and complied with. So no matter how much the Remainers whinge,and whine. I am completely confident,they will ensure the democratic process is obeyed,and complied with. . _lcc,even for you that post was desperate,and infantile. Try to keep it real. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's strange if they voted based upon sovereignty that that have been so vocally against parliamentary sovereignty, the British judiciary and the British civil service, basically so against the British constitution.Rubbish it is completely the opposite,yes you read well but do not try understand people. I am very much in favour of these things and therefore against European laws etc. We do not try to undermine the government as you do Do you believe that parliament should have a say on what we hope to achieve in the negotiations? That parliament needs to give authority for article 50 to be triggered? Do you believe that parliament should get a vote on the final Brexit deal, just as the European Parliament will get? Do you believe that it is right for British judges sitting in a British court should rule on British laws, such as the powers of the PM? Do you believe that British civil servants should be appointed based upon their professional experience and competence, rather than their political beliefs? And that it is their duty to tell truth to power? Possibly the most ridiculous post I have ever read. All of the institution's you mentioned, have the principles of democracy at their very heart. They are duty bound to ensure, The democratic process, is obeyed,and complied with. So no matter how much the Remainers whinge,and whine. I am completely confident,they will ensure the democratic process is obeyed,and complied with. . _lcc,even for you that post was desperate,and infantile. Try to keep it real. " You didn't answer a single question. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It was no rhetorical trick. You ask where will we be when we exit the EU. I ask where would we be if we stayed in the EU. That can't be difficult, can it? The truth is that both outcomes are unknowns." No, I asked how anything will be better. If you don't know then it is possible that the mechanisms that will lead to a making our lives worse will come into play. These have been laid out and described. Still no mechanism for an improvement. Better in the EU would be working on the very good position, in international terms, that we are in. What you've said adds up to zero. I'm not sure why you post  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" So, apart from immigration, we were completely in control of our security, economy, defense, and health. And one if the safest, richest, healthiest countries in the world. So the onlyvthing that possibly changes then is that we also will control immigration." Wow. We are in this position in large part due to having one of the biggest and wealthiest and most politically stable home markets on the planet. The EU. We are now leaving that organisation. You must have known that was my point. So, how does leaving make things better? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It was no rhetorical trick. You ask where will we be when we exit the EU. I ask where would we be if we stayed in the EU. That can't be difficult, can it? The truth is that both outcomes are unknowns. No, I asked how anything will be better. If you don't know then it is possible that the mechanisms that will lead to a making our lives worse will come into play. These have been laid out and described. Still no mechanism for an improvement. Better in the EU would be working on the very good position, in international terms, that we are in. What you've said adds up to zero. I'm not sure why you post "I post because you seem to think that membership of the EU is the be all and end all of the UK. The EU is a very strange political concept. It does, for instance, preclude us from negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world. It is also a rather fragile union. So, you see it as prosperity. Forever. I see it as a troubled environment. If you do not wish me to post, then I ask you to set out your vision for the future of the EU. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I post because you seem to think that membership of the EU is the be all and end all of the UK. The EU is a very strange political concept. It does, for instance, preclude us from negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world. It is also a rather fragile union. So, you see it as prosperity. Forever. I see it as a troubled environment. If you do not wish me to post, then I ask you to set out your vision for the future of the EU." Then you are mistaken. However, in a world with very large, unified powers in the form of China and the USA, being part of an organisation of a similar scale has huge benefits. Why would an assymetric deal work bwtter for us? Any organisation where you work to a common goal rather than selfishly is an odd one. It shouldn't stop you from doing it though. Still, I am curious to know what will improve once we've left. If you could lay it out in simple terms for me I'd appreciate it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I post because you seem to think that membership of the EU is the be all and end all of the UK. The EU is a very strange political concept. It does, for instance, preclude us from negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world. It is also a rather fragile union. So, you see it as prosperity. Forever. I see it as a troubled environment. If you do not wish me to post, then I ask you to set out your vision for the future of the EU. Then you are mistaken. However, in a world with very large, unified powers in the form of China and the USA, being part of an organisation of a similar scale has huge benefits. Why would an assymetric deal work bwtter for us? Any organisation where you work to a common goal rather than selfishly is an odd one. It shouldn't stop you from doing it though. Still, I am curious to know what will improve once we've left. If you could lay it out in simple terms for me I'd appreciate it." If you could say what would improve if we stayed. I have already mentioned the ability to negotiate trade deals. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I post because you seem to think that membership of the EU is the be all and end all of the UK. The EU is a very strange political concept. It does, for instance, preclude us from negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world. It is also a rather fragile union. So, you see it as prosperity. Forever. I see it as a troubled environment. If you do not wish me to post, then I ask you to set out your vision for the future of the EU. Then you are mistaken. However, in a world with very large, unified powers in the form of China and the USA, being part of an organisation of a similar scale has huge benefits. Why would an assymetric deal work bwtter for us? Any organisation where you work to a common goal rather than selfishly is an odd one. It shouldn't stop you from doing it though. Still, I am curious to know what will improve once we've left. If you could lay it out in simple terms for me I'd appreciate it. If you could say what would improve if we stayed. I have already mentioned the ability to negotiate trade deals." But you are walking away from the trade deals we already have. The EU has trade deals with 3rd countries, but even if we ignore those and just look at the EU itself. Leaving the EU is just the same as cancelling 27 trade deals that we already have. How long will it take the UK to make 28 new trade details to be in a better position than we are today? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I post because you seem to think that membership of the EU is the be all and end all of the UK. The EU is a very strange political concept. It does, for instance, preclude us from negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world. It is also a rather fragile union. So, you see it as prosperity. Forever. I see it as a troubled environment. If you do not wish me to post, then I ask you to set out your vision for the future of the EU. Then you are mistaken. However, in a world with very large, unified powers in the form of China and the USA, being part of an organisation of a similar scale has huge benefits. Why would an assymetric deal work bwtter for us? Any organisation where you work to a common goal rather than selfishly is an odd one. It shouldn't stop you from doing it though. Still, I am curious to know what will improve once we've left. If you could lay it out in simple terms for me I'd appreciate it. If you could say what would improve if we stayed. I have already mentioned the ability to negotiate trade deals. But you are walking away from the trade deals we already have. The EU has trade deals with 3rd countries, but even if we ignore those and just look at the EU itself. Leaving the EU is just the same as cancelling 27 trade deals that we already have. How long will it take the UK to make 28 new trade details to be in a better position than we are today? " under wto we are better than we are today | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I post because you seem to think that membership of the EU is the be all and end all of the UK. The EU is a very strange political concept. It does, for instance, preclude us from negotiating trade deals with the rest of the world. It is also a rather fragile union. So, you see it as prosperity. Forever. I see it as a troubled environment. If you do not wish me to post, then I ask you to set out your vision for the future of the EU. Then you are mistaken. However, in a world with very large, unified powers in the form of China and the USA, being part of an organisation of a similar scale has huge benefits. Why would an assymetric deal work bwtter for us? Any organisation where you work to a common goal rather than selfishly is an odd one. It shouldn't stop you from doing it though. Still, I am curious to know what will improve once we've left. If you could lay it out in simple terms for me I'd appreciate it." the EU does not work together, so they are not of a similar scale, you are deluded. The EU struggle to trade because they have 28 different economies to satisfy. It just doesn't work | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If you could say what would improve if we stayed. I have already mentioned the ability to negotiate trade deals." Coordinated improvement in environmental measures reducing CO2. Common policy coordination on taxing multinationals. Perhaps you could expand on The one thing that you've mentioned? How well would we better negotiate good trade terms with large states on our own rather than in a similarly powerful block? Anything else? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" under wto we are better than we are today" Really? We have zero tariffs in the EU and deals with 30 odd other countries. WTO with everyone else. If we leave it's WTO with everyone. Better how? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" the EU does not work together, so they are not of a similar scale, you are deluded. The EU struggle to trade because they have 28 different economies to satisfy. It just doesn't work" It has trade agreements with 50 countries. 27 more in the EU. That's 77. Fail. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" under wto we are better than we are today Really? We have zero tariffs in the EU and deals with 30 odd other countries. WTO with everyone else. If we leave it's WTO with everyone. Better how?" Here’s what the Director General of the CBI said about WTO rules. The practicalities of a disorderly crash-landing need to be understood. We have had conversations with some of the proponents of just walking away and we will again talk to them about what we see from our members about the consequences of that. "An exit into WTO at the stroke of midnight without the proper planning and preparation in place would be very serious for the UK economy. There are some signs that there is more conversation around that being an outcome. Our job is to demonstrate how difficult that would be because of all of these unanswered questions." "The idea of barrier-free access is an incredibly important principle for British business. Yes there may be a negotiation and yes, there may be trade-offs, but it is far too early for us to be saying in any way that these cease to be important and valid objectives for our economy.” "We do have to be incredibly careful about the reputation of the UK around the world for openness and being a welcoming trading nation. There is no doubt that the world is watching. They are watching our every move.” | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's strange if they voted based upon sovereignty that that have been so vocally against parliamentary sovereignty, the British judiciary and the British civil service, basically so against the British constitution.Rubbish it is completely the opposite,yes you read well but do not try understand people. I am very much in favour of these things and therefore against European laws etc. We do not try to undermine the government as you do Do you believe that parliament should have a say on what we hope to achieve in the negotiations? That parliament needs to give authority for article 50 to be triggered? Do you believe that parliament should get a vote on the final Brexit deal, just as the European Parliament will get? Do you believe that it is right for British judges sitting in a British court should rule on British laws, such as the powers of the PM? Do you believe that British civil servants should be appointed based upon their professional experience and competence, rather than their political beliefs? And that it is their duty to tell truth to power? " No the courts do not have the right to overrule the PM not if she is carrying out the will of the people. As for Parliament having a say do not be silly most are against Brexit and they should obey there constituents or resighn. As for what we can get, we get the best we can it will not please anybody probably but we will be out of the EU then we work to get the country stronger as a nation,you do not get this | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" No the courts do not have the right to overrule the PM not if she is carrying out the will of the people. As for Parliament having a say do not be silly most are against Brexit and they should obey there constituents or resighn. As for what we can get, we get the best we can it will not please anybody probably but we will be out of the EU then we work to get the country stronger as a nation,you do not get this" The courts do have the right and a requirement to overrule the government when it breaks or misinterprets the law. That's what an independent judiciary is for. Parliament makes laws. Parliament does what it feels is in the interest of the country. That is what representative democracy is. If it's a bad exit deal and it would hurt the country should they rubber stamp it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Random Anyway easy why not give them enough rope .
I've actually been on these threads to try and understand how this might all work out well. How I might feel more comfortable with this.
Not to just argue for the sake of it.
Never any answers though. Any positivity or thoughtfulness about how this effects everyone. No acknowledgement that the exit process will require everyone to make it work.
Just anger. Always anger.
I'd genuinely like to know how my life will improve...
It won't, but the revolutionary guards are flying the battle colours now and their Crusade is under way. Best just let them get on with it rather than try to water down their ideas and get blamed for the rest of your and their lives.
They want trade with the EU to be completely dismantled and to stop immigration. Logic dictates that both of these policies will seriously reduce the UK Treasury income and by default make the country poorer. This is not even debatable, the country - and you will not be better off until we can increase ROW trade by 40%+ and we get another influx of migrants or a massive rise in the birth rate.
Who has said they want to stop trade with the EU? Or stop immigration?"Give us a break. Hard Brexit and stopping immigration was what one the referendum. I don't see many ideologically liberal Brexiters. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Random Anyway easy why not give them enough rope .
I've actually been on these threads to try and understand how this might all work out well. How I might feel more comfortable with this.
Not to just argue for the sake of it.
Never any answers though. Any positivity or thoughtfulness about how this effects everyone. No acknowledgement that the exit process will require everyone to make it work.
Just anger. Always anger.
I'd genuinely like to know how my life will improve...
It won't, but the revolutionary guards are flying the battle colours now and their Crusade is under way. Best just let them get on with it rather than try to water down their ideas and get blamed for the rest of your and their lives.
They want trade with the EU to be completely dismantled and to stop immigration. Logic dictates that both of these policies will seriously reduce the UK Treasury income and by default make the country poorer. This is not even debatable, the country - and you will not be better off until we can increase ROW trade by 40%+ and we get another influx of migrants or a massive rise in the birth rate.
Who has said they want to stop trade with the EU? Or stop immigration?
Give us a break. Hard Brexit and stopping immigration was what one the referendum.
I don't see many ideologically liberal Brexiters."Please provide the evidence and sources of where anyone on the leave side said they wanted to stop immigration and stop trading with the EU. Controlling immigration is a whole lot different to stopping immigration. I never once heard anyone saying they didn't want to continue trading with the EU. On the contrary, what was voted for by those that voted to leave was to have control if immigration, to be able to vet those that want to come here for their skills etc. And to be able to strike our own trade deals with any country we wish to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No the courts do not have the right to overrule the PM not if she is carrying out the will of the people. " I think you'll find they do if the PM is acting outside the law, the will of the people don't come into it in this case. " As for Parliament having a say do not be silly most are against Brexit and they should obey there constituents or resighn." Oh dear..... " As for what we can get, we get the best we can it will not please anybody " That's probably the only thing that made sense | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Random Anyway easy why not give them enough rope .
I've actually been on these threads to try and understand how this might all work out well. How I might feel more comfortable with this.
Not to just argue for the sake of it.
Never any answers though. Any positivity or thoughtfulness about how this effects everyone. No acknowledgement that the exit process will require everyone to make it work.
Just anger. Always anger.
I'd genuinely like to know how my life will improve...
It won't, but the revolutionary guards are flying the battle colours now and their Crusade is under way. Best just let them get on with it rather than try to water down their ideas and get blamed for the rest of your and their lives.
They want trade with the EU to be completely dismantled and to stop immigration. Logic dictates that both of these policies will seriously reduce the UK Treasury income and by default make the country poorer. This is not even debatable, the country - and you will not be better off until we can increase ROW trade by 40%+ and we get another influx of migrants or a massive rise in the birth rate.
Who has said they want to stop trade with the EU? Or stop immigration?
Give us a break. Hard Brexit and stopping immigration was what one the referendum.
I don't see many ideologically liberal Brexiters.
Please provide the evidence and sources of where anyone on the leave side said they wanted to stop immigration and stop trading with the EU. Controlling immigration is a whole lot different to stopping immigration. I never once heard anyone saying they didn't want to continue trading with the EU.
On the contrary, what was voted for by those that voted to leave was to have control if immigration, to be able to vet those that want to come here for their skills etc. And to be able to strike our own trade deals with any country we wish to. "So "enough is enough" and "breaking point" are not euphemisms to stop immigration? What about "stop immigration and start repatriation" as was said even on here by two posters as well as (possibly you??) who said that they were voting out "just to stop immigration, not botherered about anything else." As for trading with the EU, most Brexiters are now telling us that there was no such thing as a soft Brexit, no such thing as a "Norway" or "Swiss" deal and that a hard, clean break was what Brexit means. A hard Brexit by default is the effective dismantling of existing trade relationships with the EU in favour of trade relationships elsewhere. That is what it means because we are leaving the single market. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" the EU does not work together, so they are not of a similar scale, you are deluded. The EU struggle to trade because they have 28 different economies to satisfy. It just doesn't work It has trade agreements with 50 countries. 27 more in the EU. That's 77. Fail." Is that a joke? What kind of 'trade agreements'? Fail What agreements does it have with blocs/states of a similar scale? Fail | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's strange if they voted based upon sovereignty that that have been so vocally against parliamentary sovereignty, the British judiciary and the British civil service, basically so against the British constitution.Rubbish it is completely the opposite,yes you read well but do not try understand people. I am very much in favour of these things and therefore against European laws etc. We do not try to undermine the government as you do Do you believe that parliament should have a say on what we hope to achieve in the negotiations? That parliament needs to give authority for article 50 to be triggered? Do you believe that parliament should get a vote on the final Brexit deal, just as the European Parliament will get? Do you believe that it is right for British judges sitting in a British court should rule on British laws, such as the powers of the PM? Do you believe that British civil servants should be appointed based upon their professional experience and competence, rather than their political beliefs? And that it is their duty to tell truth to power? No the courts do not have the right to overrule the PM not if she is carrying out the will of the people. As for Parliament having a say do not be silly most are against Brexit and they should obey there constituents or resighn. As for what we can get, we get the best we can it will not please anybody probably but we will be out of the EU then we work to get the country stronger as a nation,you do not get this" Right, so what I said in my original post at the top of this post was correct then. Why say its not and then confirm that it is? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"http://www.lawyersforbritain.org/int-trade.shtml This is an interesting Link, and explains quite a lot about trade deals once article 50 has been invoked. Doesn't answer everything but goes a long way and explains things in laymans terms. Possibly slightly off topic so aplogies there. Would be interesting to hear what both sides think." Errm hope I haven't broken any site rules here and if I have sorry and please remove | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"http://www.lawyersforbritain.org/int-trade.shtml This is an interesting Link, and explains quite a lot about trade deals once article 50 has been invoked. Doesn't answer everything but goes a long way and explains things in laymans terms. Possibly slightly off topic so aplogies there. Would be interesting to hear what both sides think." A bit of a heavy read for a Tuesday morning. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Is that a joke? What kind of 'trade agreements'? Fail What agreements does it have with blocs/states of a similar scale? Fail " No. Why don't you go and have a little look. The EU does not only trade with itself. Also have a think how a trade negotiation goes when the relationship is asymmetric? The larger, richer country says what its terms are. The smaller country says yes or no. Similar sized blocks actually negotiate so it takes a long time. Funnily enough the deal with the USA just failed because the people didn't like what was negotiated. Fancy that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is it with this strange Customs Union rule that prohibits us from negotiating our own trade deals anyway? What is the philosophy behind it? That we can't do what is best for us?" A customs union imposes a common set of external trade conditions. This means that once an it has come into any part of the area it can be used anywhere else. Without a customs union all trade still has to be checked at the border otherwise goods could be sneaked in from a country that sets different tariffs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Funnily enough the deal with the USA just failed because the people didn't like what was negotiated. Fancy that." And that's going to be the " deal " that the UK will do with the US! The EU rejected it because the US was, as usual, proposing something that benefitted them, and was going to hit the EU hard. The UK is going to dash into it with open arms. ( the UK was the greatest proponent of it within the EU) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Is that a joke? What kind of 'trade agreements'? Fail What agreements does it have with blocs/states of a similar scale? Fail No. Why don't you go and have a little look. The EU does not only trade with itself. Also have a think how a trade negotiation goes when the relationship is asymmetric? The larger, richer country says what its terms are. The smaller country says yes or no. Similar sized blocks actually negotiate so it takes a long time. Funnily enough the deal with the USA just failed because the people didn't like what was negotiated. Fancy that." yes fancy that. That is why major deals never get done. I have had a little look and the EU has trade agreements with people like Albania and Chile. Now if as you say, the EU are so good at doing free trade deals and want to do them then surely they will do one/want to do one with the UK won't they? If not why not? Maybe we are too big for them? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Still waiting for someone to say how this process will meaningfully improve peoples lives. All I have so far is the freedom to make unspecified deals with unspecified countries on unspecified countries whilst surrendering tariff free access to one of the largest and richest markets on the planet. Come on guys. Inspire me to get behind Brexit." I'm still waiting for you to say why the EU won't want a free trade deal with the UK? And why controlled immigration won't improve peoples' lives? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm still waiting for you to say why the EU won't want a free trade deal with the UK? And why controlled immigration won't improve peoples' lives?" How about, just for once, you back up and justify your assertions. Provide me with the mechanism whereby these things WILL improve our lives. Step through both logic paths for me. I don't understand so I need them explained. Thank you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I'm still waiting for you to say why the EU won't want a free trade deal with the UK? And why controlled immigration won't improve peoples' lives? How about, just for once, you back up and justify your assertions. Provide me with the mechanism whereby these things WILL improve our lives. Step through both logic paths for me. I don't understand so I need them explained. Thank you." You are good at asking questions but never answer any do you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You two should get a room or at the very least your own thread and duel to the death with rhetoric." ok but don't tell _lcc, he'll get jealous | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Random Anyway easy why not give them enough rope .
I've actually been on these threads to try and understand how this might all work out well. How I might feel more comfortable with this.
Not to just argue for the sake of it.
Never any answers though. Any positivity or thoughtfulness about how this effects everyone. No acknowledgement that the exit process will require everyone to make it work.
Just anger. Always anger.
I'd genuinely like to know how my life will improve...
It won't, but the revolutionary guards are flying the battle colours now and their Crusade is under way. Best just let them get on with it rather than try to water down their ideas and get blamed for the rest of your and their lives.
They want trade with the EU to be completely dismantled and to stop immigration. Logic dictates that both of these policies will seriously reduce the UK Treasury income and by default make the country poorer. This is not even debatable, the country - and you will not be better off until we can increase ROW trade by 40%+ and we get another influx of migrants or a massive rise in the birth rate.
Who has said they want to stop trade with the EU? Or stop immigration?
Give us a break. Hard Brexit and stopping immigration was what one the referendum.
I don't see many ideologically liberal Brexiters.
Please provide the evidence and sources of where anyone on the leave side said they wanted to stop immigration and stop trading with the EU. Controlling immigration is a whole lot different to stopping immigration. I never once heard anyone saying they didn't want to continue trading with the EU.
On the contrary, what was voted for by those that voted to leave was to have control if immigration, to be able to vet those that want to come here for their skills etc. And to be able to strike our own trade deals with any country we wish to.
So "enough is enough" and "breaking point" are not euphemisms to stop immigration? What about "stop immigration and start repatriation" as was said even on here by two posters as well as (possibly you??) who said that they were voting out "just to stop immigration, not botherered about anything else."
As for trading with the EU, most Brexiters are now telling us that there was no such thing as a soft Brexit, no such thing as a "Norway" or "Swiss" deal and that a hard, clean break was what Brexit means. A hard Brexit by default is the effective dismantling of existing trade relationships with the EU in favour of trade relationships elsewhere. That is what it means because we are leaving the single market."First off, I've never said stop immigration and repatriation.... I'll accept your apologies in advance For even suggesting that I did. Secondly you say a whole TWO people on here did... Wow! So that is what you're taking as the official line from the Leave campaign? Third, as for trading with the EU, David Cameron, George Osborne, Christine Lagarde, Juncker, and ALL of the other key players campaigning for remain were constantly and consistently saying throughout the campaign that "a vote to leave is a vote to leave the single market". What part of that 12 word sentence don't you understand? Still wwaiting for your sources and evidence from the Leave campaign saying "stop immigration" and "stop trade with the EU". I won't hold my breath. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You are good at asking questions but never answer any do you?" Seriously? I've never provided any answers? This is a genuinely odd statement. Scroll through this thread then have a look at where I asked for how Brexit would improve our lives, then tell me what has been written in response. Asking me how staying in the EU improves our lives (which I gave a brief reply to) does not count as an answer to my question That is just this thread. I am now just bored of getting no response. It leaves me with the conclusion that you have none. We'll see if you will answer after this then. I have never stated that immigration improves everyone's lives. However, the UK suffers from a significant shortage in a range of technical skills. Engineering and science recruits very heavily from Europe and allows for a fast and simple recruitment process. There is also a shortage of unskilled labour which employers have historically struggled to meet as locals appear not to wish to clean toilets and work in agriculture. These are more casual jobs but also require flexibility and speed to full the vacancies. The EU has a free trade deal with the UK. The terms have been agreed by 28...let me write that in another way...TWENTY EIGHT countries. That is an incredibly difficult deal to make. It's been accomplished though. Politically the remaining 27 are not going to offer the UK a deal on preferable terms to the one they have with each other. These terms include free movement of goods, services and people. This has been repeated. We, apparently, do not want the free movement of prove so there is no viable deal. Now. Your turn. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You are good at asking questions but never answer any do you? Seriously? I've never provided any answers? This is a genuinely odd statement. Scroll through this thread then have a look at where I asked for how Brexit would improve our lives, then tell me what has been written in response. Asking me how staying in the EU improves our lives (which I gave a brief reply to) does not count as an answer to my question That is just this thread. I am now just bored of getting no response. It leaves me with the conclusion that you have none. We'll see if you will answer after this then. I have never stated that immigration improves everyone's lives. However, the UK suffers from a significant shortage in a range of technical skills. Engineering and science recruits very heavily from Europe and allows for a fast and simple recruitment process. There is also a shortage of unskilled labour which employers have historically struggled to meet as locals appear not to wish to clean toilets and work in agriculture. These are more casual jobs but also require flexibility and speed to full the vacancies. The EU has a free trade deal with the UK. The terms have been agreed by 28...let me write that in another way...TWENTY EIGHT countries. That is an incredibly difficult deal to make. It's been accomplished though. Politically the remaining 27 are not going to offer the UK a deal on preferable terms to the one they have with each other. These terms include free movement of goods, services and people. This has been repeated. We, apparently, do not want the free movement of prove so there is no viable deal. Now. Your turn." you haven't answered. Why is there no viable deal without free movement of people? Or to put it another way, why is not having free movement a better deal than the one the other members have? Are you saying that free movement is bad? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What is it with this strange Customs Union rule that prohibits us from negotiating our own trade deals anyway? What is the philosophy behind it? That we can't do what is best for us? A customs union imposes a common set of external trade conditions. This means that once an it has come into any part of the area it can be used anywhere else. Without a customs union all trade still has to be checked at the border otherwise goods could be sneaked in from a country that sets different tariffs." You mean that it stifles competition between member states. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now. Your turn. you haven't answered. Why is there no viable deal without free movement of people? Or to put it another way, why is not having free movement a better deal than the one the other members have? Are you saying that free movement is bad?" I have tried. You have not had the courtesy to do the same. No answer from you, so bored now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" A customs union imposes a common set of external trade conditions. This means that once an it has come into any part of the area it can be used anywhere else. Without a customs union all trade still has to be checked at the border otherwise goods could be sneaked in from a country that sets different tariffs. You mean that it stifles competition between member states." Quite the opposite actually. There is nothing at all to prevent competition within the world's third biggest economic block. As this block is diverse this means competition in a wide range of products and services. So, any mechanisms for improving lives after Brexit or more questions? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now. Your turn. you haven't answered. Why is there no viable deal without free movement of people? Or to put it another way, why is not having free movement a better deal than the one the other members have? Are you saying that free movement is bad? I have tried. You have not had the courtesy to do the same. No answer from you, so bored now." well lets just clarify this? Is free movement of people a benefit or a penalty if not having it is a better deal? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Is that a joke? What kind of 'trade agreements'? Fail What agreements does it have with blocs/states of a similar scale? Fail No. Why don't you go and have a little look. The EU does not only trade with itself. Also have a think how a trade negotiation goes when the relationship is asymmetric? The larger, richer country says what its terms are. The smaller country says yes or no. Similar sized blocks actually negotiate so it takes a long time. Funnily enough the deal with the USA just failed because the people didn't like what was negotiated. Fancy that. yes fancy that. That is why major deals never get done. I have had a little look and the EU has trade agreements with people like Albania and Chile. Now if as you say, the EU are so good at doing free trade deals and want to do them then surely they will do one/want to do one with the UK won't they? If not why not? Maybe we are too big for them?" We already have a trade deal with the EU negotiated and developed over the last 50+ years but you and your BREXTREMIST friend are in the process of ripping it apart for no good reason at all. Not only are you risking 45% of our exports but also Britain's reputation as a country that can be relied on to stick to its word and commitments. That's going to make it even harder still to negotiate any trade agreement with anyone. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now. Your turn. you haven't answered. Why is there no viable deal without free movement of people? Or to put it another way, why is not having free movement a better deal than the one the other members have? Are you saying that free movement is bad? I have tried. You have not had the courtesy to do the same. No answer from you, so bored now. well lets just clarify this? Is free movement of people a benefit or a penalty if not having it is a better deal?" Yep another fucking question. The rhetoric is strong in this one. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now. Your turn. you haven't answered. Why is there no viable deal without free movement of people? Or to put it another way, why is not having free movement a better deal than the one the other members have? Are you saying that free movement is bad? I have tried. You have not had the courtesy to do the same. No answer from you, so bored now. well lets just clarify this? Is free movement of people a benefit or a penalty if not having it is a better deal?" I'm sure we've been through this before but I'll do it again. You can not have free movement of capitol, services and goods with out free movement of labour to. If you allow the first 3 with out the 4th then all the capitol, followed by the services, would simply move to area with the cheapest labour. By allowing free movement of labour also this gravitational effect of cheap labour is mitigated by the fact that the labour is gravitating away from the areas where it's currently cheap to the other areas, making it harder to simply move all the capitol and services to the cheaper labour area. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And I'm still waiting from the other thread for any BREXSTREMIST to explain how making it harder to trade with our closets, nearest and richest trading partners is actually going to make us better off? Or what European court anyone in this country is answerable to? Or why non elected, politically neutral civil servants are seen as essential to the functioning of democracy here in the UK but is somehow undemocratic in the EU? Three simple questions for BREXSTREMISTs to answer but none actually have answered." Well, your term does not invite measured debate. However, Mrs May has made it clear that she does not want to make it harder to trade with the EU. Our laws are currently subject to ECJ scrutiny. I don't see civil servants, either here or in the EU, as anti-democratic. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now. Your turn. you haven't answered. Why is there no viable deal without free movement of people? Or to put it another way, why is not having free movement a better deal than the one the other members have? Are you saying that free movement is bad? I have tried. You have not had the courtesy to do the same. No answer from you, so bored now. well lets just clarify this? Is free movement of people a benefit or a penalty if not having it is a better deal? I'm sure we've been through this before but I'll do it again. You can not have free movement of capitol, services and goods with out free movement of labour to. If you allow the first 3 with out the 4th then all the capitol, followed by the services, would simply move to area with the cheapest labour. By allowing free movement of labour also this gravitational effect of cheap labour is mitigated by the fact that the labour is gravitating away from the areas where it's currently cheap to the other areas, making it harder to simply move all the capitol and services to the cheaper labour area. " so all the cheap labour moves to where the capitol services and goods are and creates cheap labour | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives?" As a nation, our economy will improve. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve." How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening." By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose." But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us?" And you are seriously saying that those 77 trade deals won't be renegotiated? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us?" Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose." Well that's a start. So we give up one very significant trade deal with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has agreements with. We may or may not make other agreements. We don't know what the terms might be. Alternatively we revert to a WTO rule of some description. You do realise that bi-lateral agreements do not permit (yes, do not permit) subsidies of products which are traded tariff free don't you? You do also know that under WTO rules you can erect a tariff barrier if another country's industry is subsidised don't you? You are also undoubtedly aware that the UK blocked EU attempts to do this with respect to Chinese dumping of steel aren't you? So other than this, now more detailed, assumption, anything else? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit." We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. " Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. " and you know all this because? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. and you know all this because? " I'm not an idiot. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give." Yes, but we leave first. Trade under wto. Negotiate a new FTA with the EU. That will leave us years without FTA with the EU, and again you are ignoring the other 50 FTA that the EU has with other countries that we are walking away from. That we currently have access to, that we won't when we leave. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. and you know all this because? I'm not an idiot." He's right only an idiot would think we will get a better trade deal with the EU after brexit than we do now.That would be suicidal for the EU.We will do a deal though we have no choice about that. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. Yes, but we leave first. Trade under wto. Negotiate a new FTA with the EU. That will leave us years without FTA with the EU, and again you are ignoring the other 50 FTA that the EU has with other countries that we are walking away from. That we currently have access to, that we won't when we leave." No. We leave together. And I am sure that those others will be willing to sign on the dotted line. So, no, I am not ignoring those other countries and I am sure Mrs May is not, either. You do understand that trade agreements are difficult to negotiate from the EU because of the number of countries involved? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. Yes, but we leave first. Trade under wto. Negotiate a new FTA with the EU. That will leave us years without FTA with the EU, and again you are ignoring the other 50 FTA that the EU has with other countries that we are walking away from. That we currently have access to, that we won't when we leave. No. We leave together. And I am sure that those others will be willing to sign on the dotted line. So, no, I am not ignoring those other countries and I am sure Mrs May is not, either. You do understand that trade agreements are difficult to negotiate from the EU because of the number of countries involved?" What are you talking about "we leave together"? The UK is the only country leaving the EU, who are we together with? Who is signing on the bottom line? Please can you accept that we currently have 77 free trade agreements. As it stands at the moment, when we leave, Britain will have 0 FTA. If we are Extremely lucky, we MIGHT leave the EU with 27 FTA with the remaining member states. That means in 2 years, we will have 77 or 50 less FTA than we have today. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. Yes, but we leave first. Trade under wto. Negotiate a new FTA with the EU. That will leave us years without FTA with the EU, and again you are ignoring the other 50 FTA that the EU has with other countries that we are walking away from. That we currently have access to, that we won't when we leave. No. We leave together. And I am sure that those others will be willing to sign on the dotted line. So, no, I am not ignoring those other countries and I am sure Mrs May is not, either. You do understand that trade agreements are difficult to negotiate from the EU because of the number of countries involved? What are you talking about "we leave together"? The UK is the only country leaving the EU, who are we together with? Who is signing on the bottom line? Please can you accept that we currently have 77 free trade agreements. As it stands at the moment, when we leave, Britain will have 0 FTA. If we are Extremely lucky, we MIGHT leave the EU with 27 FTA with the remaining member states. That means in 2 years, we will have 77 or 50 less FTA than we have today. " Skewed arithmetic. We will have one trade deal with the EU and however many more we manage to (informally) neogotiate elsewhere (as, apparently, we are not permitted to formally negotiate trade deals elsewhere while we are a member. Good move that one, huh?) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. Yes, but we leave first. Trade under wto. Negotiate a new FTA with the EU. That will leave us years without FTA with the EU, and again you are ignoring the other 50 FTA that the EU has with other countries that we are walking away from. That we currently have access to, that we won't when we leave. No. We leave together. And I am sure that those others will be willing to sign on the dotted line. So, no, I am not ignoring those other countries and I am sure Mrs May is not, either. You do understand that trade agreements are difficult to negotiate from the EU because of the number of countries involved? What are you talking about "we leave together"? The UK is the only country leaving the EU, who are we together with? Who is signing on the bottom line? Please can you accept that we currently have 77 free trade agreements. As it stands at the moment, when we leave, Britain will have 0 FTA. If we are Extremely lucky, we MIGHT leave the EU with 27 FTA with the remaining member states. That means in 2 years, we will have 77 or 50 less FTA than we have today. Skewed arithmetic. We will have one trade deal with the EU and however many more we manage to (informally) neogotiate elsewhere (as, apparently, we are not permitted to formally negotiate trade deals elsewhere while we are a member. Good move that one, huh?)" Right, fine, I don’t care if you want to count the EU as 1 or 27, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER 50?!!!!!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. and you know all this because? I'm not an idiot." Really? So how much trade would we have done with the EU if we had voted to remain and the pound was say 10% stronger against the euro! Can you see the future? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The whole remain argument during the referendum was based on finances, trade, and money, which was their big mistake, only those lucky enough to have any, (or those that pretend they are of the wealthy bracket) actually gave a shit,the only ones still moaning are the pretend middle class and that's because they are afraid of not having as much money as they used to have, and this in some way my impact their ability to buy handbags and gladrags, I'm sure calling all the leavers racist over a presseco is very funny, but do you all genuinely think that any normal guy in the street gives a shit about EU trade when they havnt got a pot to piss in? Yes potatoes will go up 5p, and possibly handbags will go up €50, but I'm sure most people will find the 5p and move on,I'm guessing it will mean all the remain voters will have to keep last months handbag?? " If trade is not important then there will be no improvement in anyone's life, just higher prices. If you see no connection between trade and jobs then I'm not sure anyone has the time to explain it. Sorry. Not giving a shit about something doesn't stop it from affecting you. For instance, I do not give a shit about someone else's car, until it hits me. Then I am sad  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I thought a FTA was a two way thing? Both parties agreeing on a common set of terms?" Quite. So why would we get better terms than the 27 EU states give themselves? We are, however, in a customs union whereby we apply common external tariffs and move goods and services without checks. A free trade agreement, confusingly, does not allow the free movement of goods and services. Each market segment is checked at the border and treated differently depending on the deal. More cost. Less flexibility to react to changes in needs. Less trade flows. If we want to make external deals independently then we leave the customs union. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give." No, they're not listening, because it doesn't fit in with their anti-UK rhetoric. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I thought a FTA was a two way thing? Both parties agreeing on a common set of terms? Quite. So why would we get better terms than the 27 EU states give themselves? We are, however, in a customs union whereby we apply common external tariffs and move goods and services without checks. A free trade agreement, confusingly, does not allow the free movement of goods and services. Each market segment is checked at the border and treated differently depending on the deal. More cost. Less flexibility to react to changes in needs. Less trade flows. If we want to make external deals independently then we leave the customs union." We already deal with tariffs. The more free trade, the less paperwork, if that is what bothers you. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I thought a FTA was a two way thing? Both parties agreeing on a common set of terms? Quite. So why would we get better terms than the 27 EU states give themselves? We are, however, in a customs union whereby we apply common external tariffs and move goods and services without checks. A free trade agreement, confusingly, does not allow the free movement of goods and services. Each market segment is checked at the border and treated differently depending on the deal. More cost. Less flexibility to react to changes in needs. Less trade flows. If we want to make external deals independently then we leave the customs union." Just catching up on this thread, and the bit that seems to have been missed by those saying we can re-negotiate trade deals with the EU after we leave, is that THEY (the EU member countries) are not allowed to negotiated deals as part of the EU with us individually. So that means we need to negotiate a deal with the EU as a whole. And as someone said above, the reason the EU takes so long to negotiate a deal is because it has 28 members. So we have to somehow negotiate a deal with the EU that involves 27 members signing off on the deal from the EU side. And we expect that deal to be no significantly worse that the deal we currently have currently being a part of the EU? I just don't see how that is going to happen. I just don't see any incentive for those 27 other countries to agree to such a deal. What is in it for them? And we think this will be completed in 2 years?! -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I thought a FTA was a two way thing? Both parties agreeing on a common set of terms? Quite. So why would we get better terms than the 27 EU states give themselves? We are, however, in a customs union whereby we apply common external tariffs and move goods and services without checks. A free trade agreement, confusingly, does not allow the free movement of goods and services. Each market segment is checked at the border and treated differently depending on the deal. More cost. Less flexibility to react to changes in needs. Less trade flows. If we want to make external deals independently then we leave the customs union. Just catching up on this thread, and the bit that seems to have been missed by those saying we can re-negotiate trade deals with the EU after we leave, is that THEY (the EU member countries) are not allowed to negotiated deals as part of the EU with us individually. So that means we need to negotiate a deal with the EU as a whole. And as someone said above, the reason the EU takes so long to negotiate a deal is because it has 28 members. So we have to somehow negotiate a deal with the EU that involves 27 members signing off on the deal from the EU side. And we expect that deal to be no significantly worse that the deal we currently have currently being a part of the EU? I just don't see how that is going to happen. I just don't see any incentive for those 27 other countries to agree to such a deal. What is in it for them? And we think this will be completed in 2 years?! -Matt"  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. No, they're not listening, because it doesn't fit in with their anti-UK rhetoric." Just drop the anti-UK bullshit. It's getting old now. I can only answer for myself, but as someone who voted remain, I did it as I am PRO-UK. But in regard to the point above: "Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give." the key point is "as they are willing to give.". Now we need to look at *why* the EU would want to give us as an outsider to the EU free trade, especially if we are not willing to accepts the terms that the other 27 members have to accept to have the same privilege. That is not anti-UK, that is just stating the logic behind the situation. Yes, we may negotiate a deal with the EU as a whole, but to think that it will be on all of our terms and none of theirs is a very naive point of view. I don't get how so many leavers have the view of the EU as some evil empire, yet then think that they will just roll over and play all nice during negotiations. Pick a view and stick to it. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. No, they're not listening, because it doesn't fit in with their anti-UK rhetoric. Just drop the anti-UK bullshit. It's getting old now. I can only answer for myself, but as someone who voted remain, I did it as I am PRO-UK. But in regard to the point above: "Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give." the key point is "as they are willing to give.". Now we need to look at *why* the EU would want to give us as an outsider to the EU free trade, especially if we are not willing to accepts the terms that the other 27 members have to accept to have the same privilege. That is not anti-UK, that is just stating the logic behind the situation. Yes, we may negotiate a deal with the EU as a whole, but to think that it will be on all of our terms and none of theirs is a very naive point of view. I don't get how so many leavers have the view of the EU as some evil empire, yet then think that they will just roll over and play all nice during negotiations. Pick a view and stick to it. -Matt" Unless you are economically disadvantaged within the EU, "free" trade comes at a price. You already know that it is advantageous for the EU to carry on trading with the UK on similar terms to those that exist. So, unless they are cretins, they will. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We already deal with tariffs. The more free trade, the less paperwork, if that is what bothers you." Sorry, I don't follow this. Could you please rephrase? We will change our relationship with the EU because, by definition, we must leave the customs union to persue our own trade deals. We will have to renegotiate on an industry by industry basis with one of the wealthiest and largest markets on the planet. We will have to renegotiate every trade agreement that currently exists via the EU. Industry by industry. Country by country or trading block by trading block. We have no idea what the terms of these might be or if we will get any or when we will get them. Why would any of them be better for us than what we have now? Nothing else better other than this undefined trade "freedom"? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. No, they're not listening, because it doesn't fit in with their anti-UK rhetoric. Just drop the anti-UK bullshit. It's getting old now. I can only answer for myself, but as someone who voted remain, I did it as I am PRO-UK. But in regard to the point above: "Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give." the key point is "as they are willing to give.". Now we need to look at *why* the EU would want to give us as an outsider to the EU free trade, especially if we are not willing to accepts the terms that the other 27 members have to accept to have the same privilege. That is not anti-UK, that is just stating the logic behind the situation. Yes, we may negotiate a deal with the EU as a whole, but to think that it will be on all of our terms and none of theirs is a very naive point of view. I don't get how so many leavers have the view of the EU as some evil empire, yet then think that they will just roll over and play all nice during negotiations. Pick a view and stick to it. -Matt Unless you are economically disadvantaged within the EU, "free" trade comes at a price. You already know that it is advantageous for the EU to carry on trading with the UK on similar terms to those that exist. So, unless they are cretins, they will." Similar terms? But May has said she won't allow free movement of labour. So it is not similar terms is it? It is a totally different deal. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We already deal with tariffs. The more free trade, the less paperwork, if that is what bothers you. Sorry, I don't follow this. Could you please rephrase? We will change our relationship with the EU because, by definition, we must leave the customs union to persue our own trade deals. We will have to renegotiate on an industry by industry basis with one of the wealthiest and largest markets on the planet. We will have to renegotiate every trade agreement that currently exists via the EU. Industry by industry. Country by country or trading block by trading block. We have no idea what the terms of these might be or if we will get any or when we will get them. Why would any of them be better for us than what we have now? Nothing else better other than this undefined trade "freedom"?" That would be because at last we can negotiate them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. No, they're not listening, because it doesn't fit in with their anti-UK rhetoric. Just drop the anti-UK bullshit. It's getting old now. I can only answer for myself, but as someone who voted remain, I did it as I am PRO-UK. But in regard to the point above: "Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give." the key point is "as they are willing to give.". Now we need to look at *why* the EU would want to give us as an outsider to the EU free trade, especially if we are not willing to accepts the terms that the other 27 members have to accept to have the same privilege. That is not anti-UK, that is just stating the logic behind the situation. Yes, we may negotiate a deal with the EU as a whole, but to think that it will be on all of our terms and none of theirs is a very naive point of view. I don't get how so many leavers have the view of the EU as some evil empire, yet then think that they will just roll over and play all nice during negotiations. Pick a view and stick to it. -Matt" The EU has Free Trade Agreements with 50 non-EU countries.... how many of them have to accept Free Movement of Labour as part of that agreement? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. No, they're not listening, because it doesn't fit in with their anti-UK rhetoric. Just drop the anti-UK bullshit. It's getting old now. I can only answer for myself, but as someone who voted remain, I did it as I am PRO-UK. But in regard to the point above: "Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give." the key point is "as they are willing to give.". Now we need to look at *why* the EU would want to give us as an outsider to the EU free trade, especially if we are not willing to accepts the terms that the other 27 members have to accept to have the same privilege. That is not anti-UK, that is just stating the logic behind the situation. Yes, we may negotiate a deal with the EU as a whole, but to think that it will be on all of our terms and none of theirs is a very naive point of view. I don't get how so many leavers have the view of the EU as some evil empire, yet then think that they will just roll over and play all nice during negotiations. Pick a view and stick to it. -Matt The EU has Free Trade Agreements with 50 non-EU countries.... how many of them have to accept Free Movement of Labour as part of that agreement?" That is actually a very good point. How long did they take to negotiate? How long has the Canada deal been, 7 years? I still think that the UK moving *out* of the EU then trying to get free trade deal back though will be seen by the EU negotiators in a different light. As for others, May's disastrous trade trip to India shows that other countries that we might wanting to negotiate with are already thinking of visa-relaxation as part of the deal. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. No, they're not listening, because it doesn't fit in with their anti-UK rhetoric. Just drop the anti-UK bullshit. It's getting old now. I can only answer for myself, but as someone who voted remain, I did it as I am PRO-UK. But in regard to the point above: "Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give." the key point is "as they are willing to give.". Now we need to look at *why* the EU would want to give us as an outsider to the EU free trade, especially if we are not willing to accepts the terms that the other 27 members have to accept to have the same privilege. That is not anti-UK, that is just stating the logic behind the situation. Yes, we may negotiate a deal with the EU as a whole, but to think that it will be on all of our terms and none of theirs is a very naive point of view. I don't get how so many leavers have the view of the EU as some evil empire, yet then think that they will just roll over and play all nice during negotiations. Pick a view and stick to it. -Matt Unless you are economically disadvantaged within the EU, "free" trade comes at a price. You already know that it is advantageous for the EU to carry on trading with the UK on similar terms to those that exist. So, unless they are cretins, they will. Similar terms? But May has said she won't allow free movement of labour. So it is not similar terms is it? It is a totally different deal. -Matt" In my opinion for what it's worth, we need free movement of labour, BUT we need to be able to control said labour. Possibly a mine field but needs to be done. Also any EU nationals already here should be allowed to stay. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK?" You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now. Your turn. you haven't answered. Why is there no viable deal without free movement of people? Or to put it another way, why is not having free movement a better deal than the one the other members have? Are you saying that free movement is bad? I have tried. You have not had the courtesy to do the same. No answer from you, so bored now." Blatant answer avoidance. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No." how do you suppose a common market between 28 countries would work without political oversight? ..who would make the rules who would implement the rules who would stop the strongest countries from taking advantage of the weak ones? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No." So yes then. Everything else an assertion. Fine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Now. Your turn. you haven't answered. Why is there no viable deal without free movement of people? Or to put it another way, why is not having free movement a better deal than the one the other members have? Are you saying that free movement is bad? I have tried. You have not had the courtesy to do the same. No answer from you, so bored now. Blatant answer avoidance." I have tried but not to your satisfaction. You understand it, so you have a go... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No.how do you suppose a common market between 28 countries would work without political oversight? ..who would make the rules who would implement the rules who would stop the strongest countries from taking advantage of the weak ones?" hilarious!
what do you think has already happened? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No. So yes then. Everything else an assertion. Fine." An assertion? Of course. If you think our place in the EU fits and is hunky dory, that is great. What do you think the point of the EU is? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No.how do you suppose a common market between 28 countries would work without political oversight? ..who would make the rules who would implement the rules who would stop the strongest countries from taking advantage of the weak ones? hilarious!
what do you think has already happened?"Was Britain strong or weak? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No.how do you suppose a common market between 28 countries would work without political oversight? ..who would make the rules who would implement the rules who would stop the strongest countries from taking advantage of the weak ones?" Are you advocating some form of communism? Do we pay to compensate "the weak ones?" Yet it didn't seem to happen with those Greeks. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No.how do you suppose a common market between 28 countries would work without political oversight? ..who would make the rules who would implement the rules who would stop the strongest countries from taking advantage of the weak ones? hilarious!
what do you think has already happened?
Was Britain strong or weak? "strong | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. No, they're not listening, because it doesn't fit in with their anti-UK rhetoric. Just drop the anti-UK bullshit. It's getting old now. I can only answer for myself, but as someone who voted remain, I did it as I am PRO-UK. But in regard to the point above: "Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give." the key point is "as they are willing to give.". Now we need to look at *why* the EU would want to give us as an outsider to the EU free trade, especially if we are not willing to accepts the terms that the other 27 members have to accept to have the same privilege. That is not anti-UK, that is just stating the logic behind the situation. Yes, we may negotiate a deal with the EU as a whole, but to think that it will be on all of our terms and none of theirs is a very naive point of view. I don't get how so many leavers have the view of the EU as some evil empire, yet then think that they will just roll over and play all nice during negotiations. Pick a view and stick to it. -Matt Unless you are economically disadvantaged within the EU, "free" trade comes at a price. You already know that it is advantageous for the EU to carry on trading with the UK on similar terms to those that exist. So, unless they are cretins, they will." It's also advantages for the UK to carry on trading with the EU on similar terms those that exist now, which is unfettered, unhindered, with fair arbitration, and free movement of goods, services, capitol and labour. And you're absolutely right, only a cretin would through that away, so why are the BREXTREMISTs doing exactly that? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. No, they're not listening, because it doesn't fit in with their anti-UK rhetoric. Just drop the anti-UK bullshit. It's getting old now. I can only answer for myself, but as someone who voted remain, I did it as I am PRO-UK. But in regard to the point above: "Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give." the key point is "as they are willing to give.". Now we need to look at *why* the EU would want to give us as an outsider to the EU free trade, especially if we are not willing to accepts the terms that the other 27 members have to accept to have the same privilege. That is not anti-UK, that is just stating the logic behind the situation. Yes, we may negotiate a deal with the EU as a whole, but to think that it will be on all of our terms and none of theirs is a very naive point of view. I don't get how so many leavers have the view of the EU as some evil empire, yet then think that they will just roll over and play all nice during negotiations. Pick a view and stick to it. -Matt Unless you are economically disadvantaged within the EU, "free" trade comes at a price. You already know that it is advantageous for the EU to carry on trading with the UK on similar terms to those that exist. So, unless they are cretins, they will. It's also advantages for the UK to carry on trading with the EU on similar terms those that exist now, which is unfettered, unhindered, with fair arbitration, and free movement of goods, services, capitol and labour. And you're absolutely right, only a cretin would through that away, so why are the BREXTREMISTs doing exactly that?" The (silly term) are not advocating throwing away free trade with the EU. They are adocating not being part of the restrictive and silly political system that comes with it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. No, they're not listening, because it doesn't fit in with their anti-UK rhetoric. Just drop the anti-UK bullshit. It's getting old now. I can only answer for myself, but as someone who voted remain, I did it as I am PRO-UK. But in regard to the point above: "Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give." the key point is "as they are willing to give.". Now we need to look at *why* the EU would want to give us as an outsider to the EU free trade, especially if we are not willing to accepts the terms that the other 27 members have to accept to have the same privilege. That is not anti-UK, that is just stating the logic behind the situation. Yes, we may negotiate a deal with the EU as a whole, but to think that it will be on all of our terms and none of theirs is a very naive point of view. I don't get how so many leavers have the view of the EU as some evil empire, yet then think that they will just roll over and play all nice during negotiations. Pick a view and stick to it. -Matt The EU has Free Trade Agreements with 50 non-EU countries.... how many of them have to accept Free Movement of Labour as part of that agreement?" Most, so called, free trade agreements normally include some form of visa waver program or relaxation of existing travel and immigration restrictions. The amount of less restricted movement aloud is normally very closely related to the actual amount of genuinely free trade the deal actually gives. Perhaps a better name for a lot of these, so called, free trade agreements would be "freer trade agreement" or maybe even just "fair trade agreement". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's also advantages for the UK to carry on trading with the EU on similar terms those that exist now, which is unfettered, unhindered, with fair arbitration, and free movement of goods, services, capitol and labour. And you're absolutely right, only a cretin would through that away, so why are the BREXTREMISTs doing exactly that?" Free trade is great, but is it worth the loss of self determination, to avoid a worse case scenario of 3.5% tariffs? I'll take the tariffs if that is the cost of self rule. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's also advantages for the UK to carry on trading with the EU on similar terms those that exist now, which is unfettered, unhindered, with fair arbitration, and free movement of goods, services, capitol and labour. And you're absolutely right, only a cretin would through that away, so why are the BREXTREMISTs doing exactly that? Free trade is great, but is it worth the loss of self determination, to avoid a worse case scenario of 3.5% tariffs? I'll take the tariffs if that is the cost of self rule." and with currency fluctuations it won't make a bit of difference | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No." As a point of information the Common Market was renamed the Customs Union when the European Economic Community (EEC) became the European Community (EC). So, if the common market was OK why does changing its name to 'Customs Union' suddenly make it not ago. Also, could you tell me what freedom you ever had has been depressed by the EU because I can't find any? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No.how do you suppose a common market between 28 countries would work without political oversight? ..who would make the rules who would implement the rules who would stop the strongest countries from taking advantage of the weak ones? hilarious!
what do you think has already happened?"Maybe you could give some examples? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's also advantages for the UK to carry on trading with the EU on similar terms those that exist now, which is unfettered, unhindered, with fair arbitration, and free movement of goods, services, capitol and labour. And you're absolutely right, only a cretin would through that away, so why are the BREXTREMISTs doing exactly that? Free trade is great, but is it worth the loss of self determination, to avoid a worse case scenario of 3.5% tariffs? I'll take the tariffs if that is the cost of self rule." We already have self determination, if we didn't we wouldn't be able to leave. So it's really 3.5% tariffs plus a lot of other non tariff barriers for absolutely nothing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No. As a point of information the Common Market was renamed the Customs Union when the European Economic Community (EEC) became the European Community (EC). So, if the common market was OK why does changing its name to 'Customs Union' suddenly make it not ago. Also, could you tell me what freedom you ever had has been depressed by the EU because I can't find any?" I don't wish to support failing economies. I don't wish for our econmic efforts to be thwarted by silly restrictions. I don't wish to send money to the EU for them to send a proportion back. I don't wish to pay for their infrastructure. And I want a powerful vacuum cleaner. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No.how do you suppose a common market between 28 countries would work without political oversight? ..who would make the rules who would implement the rules who would stop the strongest countries from taking advantage of the weak ones? hilarious!
what do you think has already happened?
Maybe you could give some examples?"Germany - the Euro - Southern Europe | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" It's also advantages for the UK to carry on trading with the EU on similar terms those that exist now, which is unfettered, unhindered, with fair arbitration, and free movement of goods, services, capitol and labour. And you're absolutely right, only a cretin would through that away, so why are the BREXTREMISTs doing exactly that? Free trade is great, but is it worth the loss of self determination, to avoid a worse case scenario of 3.5% tariffs? I'll take the tariffs if that is the cost of self rule. and with currency fluctuations it won't make a bit of difference" A constant 3.5% above what it would be will always make a difference and, as inflation resulting from our devalueation takes hold, our costs will increase, eventually wiping out any advantage from the devalueation. Added to that the none tariff barriers that, with out fair and legally binding arbitration, will inevitably be introduced by both parties; we could be looking at quite a lot more loss than you overly optimistic think. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I don't wish to support failing economies. I don't wish for our econmic efforts to be thwarted by silly restrictions. I don't wish to send money to the EU for them to send a proportion back. I don't wish to pay for their infrastructure. And I want a powerful vacuum cleaner." And I, and many others don't have a " fuck you" mentality; we wish to support economies that are having troubles; we wish to change states that have issues with equality, with liberal thinking, to change themselves, to join with the nTionscthTvenjoy liberalism, freedom of choice, freedom of religion and belief; We want them to join us and be enlightened, not to dismiss them, not to hate them, not to turn them against us, By being selfish, by being superior, by trying to behave like the USA, and just wringing money out if them, by treating them with disdain, we mKe the world worse. That is, of course, the aim of the Trumps, the Farages, the LePens the Boris Johnsons and the Goves of this world, they care nothing for anyone but themselves. As humans, we should be advancing other humans, not attscking them, and alienating them | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I don't wish to support failing economies. I don't wish for our econmic efforts to be thwarted by silly restrictions. I don't wish to send money to the EU for them to send a proportion back. I don't wish to pay for their infrastructure. And I want a powerful vacuum cleaner. And I, and many others don't have a " fuck you" mentality; we wish to support economies that are having troubles; we wish to change states that have issues with equality, with liberal thinking, to change themselves, to join with the nTionscthTvenjoy liberalism, freedom of choice, freedom of religion and belief; We want them to join us and be enlightened, not to dismiss them, not to hate them, not to turn them against us, By being selfish, by being superior, by trying to behave like the USA, and just wringing money out if them, by treating them with disdain, we mKe the world worse. That is, of course, the aim of the Trumps, the Farages, the LePens the Boris Johnsons and the Goves of this world, they care nothing for anyone but themselves. As humans, we should be advancing other humans, not attscking them, and alienating them " Have a word with Merkel then | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Free trade is great, but is it worth the loss of self determination, to avoid a worse case scenario of 3.5% tariffs? I'll take the tariffs if that is the cost of self rule. and with currency fluctuations it won't make a bit of difference A constant 3.5% above what it would be will always make a difference and, as inflation resulting from our devalueation takes hold, our costs will increase, eventually wiping out any advantage from the devalueation. Added to that the none tariff barriers that, with out fair and legally binding arbitration, will inevitably be introduced by both parties; we could be looking at quite a lot more loss than you overly optimistic think." IF the negotiations failed to give eu free trade and we ended up with tariffs, it would also make UK goods more attractively priced to uk buyers, increasing uk based manufacturing. We import more from the eu than we export, so any tariffs are a net gain to HMRC. I export uk manufactuted goods all over the world and currently it makes no difference at all if I am selling to EU, USA or Australia it is as simple in any of those markets. So lets get a FTA with the eu if we can, if not I won't lose any sleep. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No. As a point of information the Common Market was renamed the Customs Union when the European Economic Community (EEC) became the European Community (EC). So, if the common market was OK why does changing its name to 'Customs Union' suddenly make it not ago. Also, could you tell me what freedom you ever had has been repressed by the EU because I can't find any? I don't wish to support failing economies. I don't wish for our econmic efforts to be thwarted by silly restrictions. I don't wish to send money to the EU for them to send a proportion back. I don't wish to pay for their infrastructure. " How does any of that happening repress any of your rights. I understand that you may not like or agree with them happening but I really don't see how you can claim that any of them are repressing you in anyway at all. " And I want a powerful vacuum cleaner." I agree with you on that; you can include fast kettles and lights that actually come on bright when I flip the switch and toilets that actually send everything down the pan on the first flush. However I don't consider any of these to be fundamental rights or that the EU is repressing me by introducing legislation on them. All of these new rules are the result of international agreements designed to reduce environmental impact (I'm not convinced they'll have the desired effect) and, if not introduced at EU level would have to have been introduced at the national level in order to meet our international commitments. So leaving the EU will make no difference to any of them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No.how do you suppose a common market between 28 countries would work without political oversight? ..who would make the rules who would implement the rules who would stop the strongest countries from taking advantage of the weak ones? hilarious!
what do you think has already happened?
Maybe you could give some examples?
Germany - the Euro - Southern Europe"That's just a list that tells me nothing. What is it that they're meant to have done? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I don't wish to support failing economies. I don't wish for our econmic efforts to be thwarted by silly restrictions. I don't wish to send money to the EU for them to send a proportion back. I don't wish to pay for their infrastructure. And I want a powerful vacuum cleaner. And I, and many others don't have a " fuck you" mentality; we wish to support economies that are having troubles; we wish to change states that have issues with equality, with liberal thinking, to change themselves, to join with the nTionscthTvenjoy liberalism, freedom of choice, freedom of religion and belief; We want them to join us and be enlightened, not to dismiss them, not to hate them, not to turn them against us, By being selfish, by being superior, by trying to behave like the USA, and just wringing money out if them, by treating them with disdain, we mKe the world worse. That is, of course, the aim of the Trumps, the Farages, the LePens the Boris Johnsons and the Goves of this world, they care nothing for anyone but themselves. As humans, we should be advancing other humans, not attscking them, and alienating them Have a word with Merkel then" She has done the correct and human thing in trying to support people; unlike the UK which said " fuck you" to people needing help. The UK's attitude is shameful. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I don't wish to support failing economies. I don't wish for our econmic efforts to be thwarted by silly restrictions. I don't wish to send money to the EU for them to send a proportion back. I don't wish to pay for their infrastructure. And I want a powerful vacuum cleaner. And I, and many others don't have a " fuck you" mentality; we wish to support economies that are having troubles; we wish to change states that have issues with equality, with liberal thinking, to change themselves, to join with the nTionscthTvenjoy liberalism, freedom of choice, freedom of religion and belief; We want them to join us and be enlightened, not to dismiss them, not to hate them, not to turn them against us, By being selfish, by being superior, by trying to behave like the USA, and just wringing money out if them, by treating them with disdain, we mKe the world worse. That is, of course, the aim of the Trumps, the Farages, the LePens the Boris Johnsons and the Goves of this world, they care nothing for anyone but themselves. As humans, we should be advancing other humans, not attscking them, and alienating them Have a word with Merkel then She has done the correct and human thing in trying to support people; unlike the UK which said " fuck you" to people needing help. The UK's attitude is shameful." In your opinion (you missed that bit) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I would suggest we should make them responsible and accountable for the decisions they make on brexit .Remainers will try to water down brexit which makes you again complicit and open to accussations of being a reason for failure.Regarding standing up and being counted the democracy i am being told to stand up for is illusionary imho. .If you're involved then you are complicit.
I totally agree with you on this. Let the revolutionaries have their revoluation and let them be accountable for its success or failure.
I personally voted to remain because I cant possibly see how making free trade agreements with countries on the other side of the world whilst destroying trading relationships with our near neighbours is going to make us better off, it is simply illogical.
That said, I do actually think it is for the Brexiters to carry their flag on the Crusade that they have embarked on and be prepared to live or die from the consequences without having any ability whatsoever to blame anyone if it goes wrong whilst at the same time earning all the rights and expectations to be complimented if it is a success."..we weren't allowed to vote , but well said! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I don't wish to support failing economies. I don't wish for our econmic efforts to be thwarted by silly restrictions. I don't wish to send money to the EU for them to send a proportion back. I don't wish to pay for their infrastructure. And I want a powerful vacuum cleaner. And I, and many others don't have a " fuck you" mentality; we wish to support economies that are having troubles; we wish to change states that have issues with equality, with liberal thinking, to change themselves, to join with the nTionscthTvenjoy liberalism, freedom of choice, freedom of religion and belief; We want them to join us and be enlightened, not to dismiss them, not to hate them, not to turn them against us, By being selfish, by being superior, by trying to behave like the USA, and just wringing money out if them, by treating them with disdain, we mKe the world worse. That is, of course, the aim of the Trumps, the Farages, the LePens the Boris Johnsons and the Goves of this world, they care nothing for anyone but themselves. As humans, we should be advancing other humans, not attscking them, and alienating them " Like the EU have treated Greece then? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In summary: The only life enhancing outcome from this process is better trade deals with countries that we currently trade with under WTO rules. We do not know if, when or what form these will be. To achieve this we must leave the customs union and renegotiate the terms of trade with the EU and all of the countries that the EU has a trade deal with. We do not know if, when or what form these will be either. Any deal or no trade deal at all is better than uncontrolled EU immigration, but nobody will say why. Is that it? What you want me to get behind? That will improve the life of everyone in the UK? You won't. That would be because you can't see the negatives in our current position or the positives in our future. We are currently limited in our trade position. We are tied to a political structure that does not suit us (or any EU country not aligned with the EU philosophy). We are supporting countries who cannot pay their bills. We are supporting a culture of anti-competitiveness. We are supporting an organisation that we pay more into than we get out. An organisation with an aim to appease many different political cultures in a one-solves-all manner. Not for me. Not for the majority of voters, either. A common market? A trading agreement? Yes. A political union with our freedom repressed? And others? No.how do you suppose a common market between 28 countries would work without political oversight? ..who would make the rules who would implement the rules who would stop the strongest countries from taking advantage of the weak ones? hilarious!
what do you think has already happened?
Maybe you could give some examples?
Germany - the Euro - Southern Europe
That's just a list that tells me nothing. What is it that they're meant to have done?" really? In short Germany (the ECB) allowed the southern countries to borrow too much when the Euro was introduced so that they could sell their goods/cars more easily to the south. The Latin countries are now ground down by being trapped within a single currency which suits German exporters while making their own goods more difficult to sell. As their economies weaken talent is flowing out and exacerbating the problem. And the German answer to the problem? Austerity. Let them suffer for our greed and their incompetence.
There is a lot more to it so maybe you should research more the people/system/organisation you endorse | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I don't wish to support failing economies. I don't wish for our econmic efforts to be thwarted by silly restrictions. I don't wish to send money to the EU for them to send a proportion back. I don't wish to pay for their infrastructure. And I want a powerful vacuum cleaner. And I, and many others don't have a " fuck you" mentality; we wish to support economies that are having troubles; we wish to change states that have issues with equality, with liberal thinking, to change themselves, to join with the nTionscthTvenjoy liberalism, freedom of choice, freedom of religion and belief; We want them to join us and be enlightened, not to dismiss them, not to hate them, not to turn them against us, By being selfish, by being superior, by trying to behave like the USA, and just wringing money out if them, by treating them with disdain, we mKe the world worse. That is, of course, the aim of the Trumps, the Farages, the LePens the Boris Johnsons and the Goves of this world, they care nothing for anyone but themselves. As humans, we should be advancing other humans, not attscking them, and alienating them Have a word with Merkel then She has done the correct and human thing in trying to support people; unlike the UK which said " fuck you" to people needing help. The UK's attitude is shameful." It is the EU which is isolationist and Protectionist. Did you not hear what Teresa May said today? She said when Britain leaves the EU we will once more become a global trading nation once again, open to the whole world. We can also end the EU's discriminationary rules on free movement of people and treat all immigrants from all over the world equally with the same rules applying the same to all, instead of EU nationals getting preferential treatment which is discriminationary against non EU nationals. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I don't wish to support failing economies. I don't wish for our econmic efforts to be thwarted by silly restrictions. I don't wish to send money to the EU for them to send a proportion back. I don't wish to pay for their infrastructure. And I want a powerful vacuum cleaner. And I, and many others don't have a " fuck you" mentality; we wish to support economies that are having troubles; we wish to change states that have issues with equality, with liberal thinking, to change themselves, to join with the nTionscthTvenjoy liberalism, freedom of choice, freedom of religion and belief; We want them to join us and be enlightened, not to dismiss them, not to hate them, not to turn them against us, By being selfish, by being superior, by trying to behave like the USA, and just wringing money out if them, by treating them with disdain, we mKe the world worse. That is, of course, the aim of the Trumps, the Farages, the LePens the Boris Johnsons and the Goves of this world, they care nothing for anyone but themselves. As humans, we should be advancing other humans, not attscking them, and alienating them Have a word with Merkel then She has done the correct and human thing in trying to support people; unlike the UK which said " fuck you" to people needing help. The UK's attitude is shameful. It is the EU which is isolationist and Protectionist. Did you not hear what Teresa May said today? She said when Britain leaves the EU we will once more become a global trading nation once again, open to the whole world. We can also end the EU's discriminationary rules on free movement of people and treat all immigrants from all over the world equally with the same rules applying the same to all, instead of EU nationals getting preferential treatment which is discriminationary against non EU nationals. " Blah blah blah. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I don't wish to support failing economies. I don't wish for our econmic efforts to be thwarted by silly restrictions. I don't wish to send money to the EU for them to send a proportion back. I don't wish to pay for their infrastructure. And I want a powerful vacuum cleaner. And I, and many others don't have a " fuck you" mentality; we wish to support economies that are having troubles; we wish to change states that have issues with equality, with liberal thinking, to change themselves, to join with the nTionscthTvenjoy liberalism, freedom of choice, freedom of religion and belief; We want them to join us and be enlightened, not to dismiss them, not to hate them, not to turn them against us, By being selfish, by being superior, by trying to behave like the USA, and just wringing money out if them, by treating them with disdain, we mKe the world worse. That is, of course, the aim of the Trumps, the Farages, the LePens the Boris Johnsons and the Goves of this world, they care nothing for anyone but themselves. As humans, we should be advancing other humans, not attscking them, and alienating them Have a word with Merkel then She has done the correct and human thing in trying to support people; unlike the UK which said " fuck you" to people needing help. The UK's attitude is shameful. It is the EU which is isolationist and Protectionist. Did you not hear what Teresa May said today? She said when Britain leaves the EU we will once more become a global trading nation once again, open to the whole world. We can also end the EU's discriminationary rules on free movement of people and treat all immigrants from all over the world equally with the same rules applying the same to all, instead of EU nationals getting preferential treatment which is discriminationary against non EU nationals. " If Scotland voted to leave the UK, would you allow free movement of Scots, or would that be discriminatory? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We currently have FTA with Norway, Turkey, Switzerland and South Korea (to name just a few). Does anyone dispute that we will lose these FTA in March 2019 or whenever the article 50 negotiations are concluded? When will we sign new FTA with these countries? " So no Leaver can answer this? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We currently have FTA with Norway, Turkey, Switzerland and South Korea (to name just a few). Does anyone dispute that we will lose these FTA in March 2019 or whenever the article 50 negotiations are concluded? When will we sign new FTA with these countries? So no Leaver can answer this? " Yes I can ! We don't care ! We have almost got our Country Back ! Hopefully minus the Scots !  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We currently have FTA with Norway, Turkey, Switzerland and South Korea (to name just a few). Does anyone dispute that we will lose these FTA in March 2019 or whenever the article 50 negotiations are concluded? When will we sign new FTA with these countries? So no Leaver can answer this? " Can any Remainer answer it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We currently have FTA with Norway, Turkey, Switzerland and South Korea (to name just a few). Does anyone dispute that we will lose these FTA in March 2019 or whenever the article 50 negotiations are concluded? When will we sign new FTA with these countries? So no Leaver can answer this? Can any Remainer answer it?" But you keep saying how good brexit will be for free trade, but these are FTA that we currently have, but will lose. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We currently have FTA with Norway, Turkey, Switzerland and South Korea (to name just a few). Does anyone dispute that we will lose these FTA in March 2019 or whenever the article 50 negotiations are concluded? When will we sign new FTA with these countries? So no Leaver can answer this? Can any Remainer answer it? But you keep saying how good brexit will be for free trade, but these are FTA that we currently have, but will lose. " The question was when will we sign new agreements. How the fook can anyone answer that, leaver or remainer? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We currently have FTA with Norway, Turkey, Switzerland and South Korea (to name just a few). Does anyone dispute that we will lose these FTA in March 2019 or whenever the article 50 negotiations are concluded? When will we sign new FTA with these countries? So no Leaver can answer this? Can any Remainer answer it? But you keep saying how good brexit will be for free trade, but these are FTA that we currently have, but will lose. The question was when will we sign new agreements. How the fook can anyone answer that, leaver or remainer? " Right, so can you finally accept that we will have less FTA when we leave, than we have today? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How does Brexit improve our lives? As a nation, our economy will improve. How? What's the mechanism? I've been asked and attempted to provide some quite detailed explanations and provided many of my own volition. A bland assertion is not very enlightening. By being permitted (yes, "permitted") to strike trade deals. By being allowed to support our own industries in the way we choose. But you are walking away from 77 trade deals that we already have, and starting again. So how does that benefit us? Mrs May made it very clear that we are not "walking away" from our trade with the EU. We are seeking other trade agreements in addition. And avoiding sending massive payments to the EU. So, yes, we will achieve an economic benefit. We are not walking away from trade with the EU? We are certainly walking away from the free trade agreement that we have with the EU. That will damage trade. When we leave the EU, we will end all the free trade agreements, that we as members of the EU have access to, with 3rd countries wont we? So that will be detrimental. Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give. No, they're not listening, because it doesn't fit in with their anti-UK rhetoric. Just drop the anti-UK bullshit. It's getting old now. I can only answer for myself, but as someone who voted remain, I did it as I am PRO-UK. But in regard to the point above: "Did you listen to Mrs May? She wants as much free trade with the EU as they are willing to give." the key point is "as they are willing to give.". Now we need to look at *why* the EU would want to give us as an outsider to the EU free trade, especially if we are not willing to accepts the terms that the other 27 members have to accept to have the same privilege. That is not anti-UK, that is just stating the logic behind the situation. Yes, we may negotiate a deal with the EU as a whole, but to think that it will be on all of our terms and none of theirs is a very naive point of view. I don't get how so many leavers have the view of the EU as some evil empire, yet then think that they will just roll over and play all nice during negotiations. Pick a view and stick to it. -Matt The EU has Free Trade Agreements with 50 non-EU countries.... how many of them have to accept Free Movement of Labour as part of that agreement? Most, so called, free trade agreements normally include some form of visa waver program or relaxation of existing travel and immigration restrictions. The amount of less restricted movement aloud is normally very closely related to the actual amount of genuinely free trade the deal actually gives. Perhaps a better name for a lot of these, so called, free trade agreements would be "freer trade agreement" or maybe even just "fair trade agreement"." The answer you're looking for, and don't seem able or willing to answer, is 4.... 4 out of 50 non-EU FTAs include free movement clauses. And it's the EU that calls them Free Trade Agreements, not 'freer trade', or 'fair trade'- 'free trade'. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We currently have FTA with Norway, Turkey, Switzerland and South Korea (to name just a few). Does anyone dispute that we will lose these FTA in March 2019 or whenever the article 50 negotiations are concluded? When will we sign new FTA with these countries? So no Leaver can answer this? Can any Remainer answer it? But you keep saying how good brexit will be for free trade, but these are FTA that we currently have, but will lose. The question was when will we sign new agreements. How the fook can anyone answer that, leaver or remainer? Right, so can you finally accept that we will have less FTA when we leave, than we have today? " So still no Brexiter willing to accept reality then? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We currently have FTA with Norway, Turkey, Switzerland and South Korea (to name just a few). Does anyone dispute that we will lose these FTA in March 2019 or whenever the article 50 negotiations are concluded? When will we sign new FTA with these countries? So no Leaver can answer this? Can any Remainer answer it? But you keep saying how good brexit will be for free trade, but these are FTA that we currently have, but will lose. The question was when will we sign new agreements. How the fook can anyone answer that, leaver or remainer? Right, so can you finally accept that we will have less FTA when we leave, than we have today? So still no Brexiter willing to accept reality then? " we probably will have yes and so will the EU. So what? We will make deals on our terms. You think the EU will get as good as deals as they would have without the UK being a part of it? Not a chance. They will need to do a good deal with the UK just to stand still. Are you a defeatist about everything? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"We currently have FTA with Norway, Turkey, Switzerland and South Korea (to name just a few). Does anyone dispute that we will lose these FTA in March 2019 or whenever the article 50 negotiations are concluded? When will we sign new FTA with these countries? So no Leaver can answer this? Can any Remainer answer it? But you keep saying how good brexit will be for free trade, but these are FTA that we currently have, but will lose. The question was when will we sign new agreements. How the fook can anyone answer that, leaver or remainer? Right, so can you finally accept that we will have less FTA when we leave, than we have today? So still no Brexiter willing to accept reality then? we probably will have yes and so will the EU. So what? We will make deals on our terms. You think the EU will get as good as deals as they would have without the UK being a part of it? Not a chance. They will need to do a good deal with the UK just to stand still. Are you a defeatist about everything?" .. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well I'm delighted that everyone keen for us to leave the EU is making such an effort to reassure the remainers and are trying their best to unite the country. I have only really heard: "we don't know what's coming next but it will be better" or "we don't care what's coming next but it will be better". Also a bit of "stop whining you're losers, just get on with it". What a better, kinder future we can look forward to. Thanks "How are you trying to unite the country? Why not be happy for the majority who voted to leave and think, you know what? Maybe they are right and I'm wrong. I'm going to start feeling positive about this, because whatever anybody says to you it will make no difference. Its up to you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" How are you trying to unite the country? Why not be happy for the majority who voted to leave and think, you know what? Maybe they are right and I'm wrong. I'm going to start feeling positive about this, because whatever anybody says to you it will make no difference. Its up to you" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
