Printable View
The Bank of England has reduced its interest rate to the lowest in 300 years....how does that translate to good tidings for the UK, Rand? :confused:
And Hazir makes a good point about pension funding, with the changes in currency valuations and debt obligations. What happens to the seniors/pensioners now?
I'm paying £13.68 less interest a month on my mortgage.
Seems like Norway isn't in favor of a British Efta membership.
Source?
www.politico.euQuote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
I know that schadenfreude is a bad habit, but still it kinda made me smile when the G20 turns out to be the place where ms May is confronted with the fact that 'Project Fear' actually very much was a Project Reality.
WWIII has begun?
The UK has descended into a great DIY recession?
Interest rates have gone up?
We've found ourselves with no friends or allies?
Which part of Project Bullshit has become real as its all been bollocks so far.
No Randblade, none of those things have happened. But what is becoming obvious now is that behind "Brexit is Brexit" hides the truth that Brexit is what foreigners decide it means. The only person foolish enough to blabber about starting negotiations is the Australian PM, who soon will learn that the UK won't be talking to him in any way the world could witness because it would expose the UK's government as a government you can't trust to keep its word. Also, it would make for a situation where the UK would have to negotiate with an organisation which of the rules it broke in a flagrant way while still being a member.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Your Brexit Randblade, is our toy. And we can make it as hard or soft as we fancy.
The UK is already talking to Australia. And Canada and India and others.
No rules broken, we are perfectly entitled to talk to whoever we want. New deals can't go into place until we have left the old one but that doesn't mean we can't have the negotiations beginning already.
In the meantime, back in the real world, Services PMI has posted the biggest jump in 20 years.
Negotiations themselves are in violation of the rules. Also any other party would have to be stupid negotiating with a UK that doesn't even know what it has on offer. Talk about talking does you more harm than good.
I'm not impressed either by the data you use to prove that a brexit that even didn't happen is a success. Whether or not brexit is a success you won't know until you have been told by Brussels what brexit means.
Your own PM had it right when she didn't go further than saying that brexit is brexit because whatever else she may hope about its definition is by and large irrelevant.
What rule does negotiating for the future violate? And why should we give a damn, which we don't ...
We're not just talking about talking, we have a PM actively talking and a Cabinet Secretary whose job it is to be talking. Negotiations are already beginning all over the globe whether you like it or not.
Of course you wouldn't give a damn about exposing yourself as unreliable just before you try to get an agreement with the EU. You already thought it makes sense to piss us off a bit beforehand. That shows the extent of how serious you are as a partner.
Shouldn't surprise anyone you have to pin your hopes on the words of a PM of a country that changes PM's faster than a prostitute changes her panties.
We're not unreliable, there is zero reason not to start conversations already. You've not shown any rule saying we can't talk and there is no reason whatsoever that we shouldn't. It would be the height of irresponsibility to not even start conversations for a couple of years, starting talking now shows we are serious not irresponsible.
As for changing PM, we're now on the sixth PM of my lifetime. Our PMs were changed in 1979 (before I was born), 1990, 1997 (because voters changed parties), 2007, 2010 (because voters changed parties) and 2016.
So our PM's served 11, 7, 10, 3 and 6 years respectively. Not sure how often a prostitute changes her panties but that seems quite reasonable.
I was talking about Australia. Otherwise what you say reduces the big opportunities you're crawing about effectively mean that people met May in China and indicated they should talk some time in the future. It's called being polite, it doesn't add up to starting any serious talks.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
I hope the EU's negotiators read that memo from the Japanese govt. very closely :o
Most expert opinion seems to agree that real negotiations would be prohibited by art. 3 and art. 207 of the TFEU although the EU would not necessarily be obligated to make a fuss if art. 50 were activated. In other words, it would be possible to come to an agreement. However, you should give a damn because, unless there is such an agreement, by holding real negotiations you may be in violation of a treaty that is still considered to be valid. The possible consequences of that are fines or other official punishments as well as even less amicable negotiations.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Not good news. Not good at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
The warning in the covering letter to the UK government could not be clearer. It says: “Japanese businesses with their European headquarters in the UK may decide to transfer their head-office function to continental Europe if EU laws cease to be applicable in the UK after its withdrawal.”
Ah but just noticed you've quoted from that hateful rag the Grauniad, so it's probably all made up. :o
Like I said, I hope the EU's negotiators take heed of these signals.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Because Japan seems in such a hurry to bend down to China and agree to let China unilaterally settle all disputes, write their laws, agree their trade policy. Oh wait, they're not.
We should all take heed of these signals, then proceed to ignore them if they don't match what we desire. "Do as I say and not as I do" is never a particularly strong argument.
Which so-called "experts"? Neither Article 3 nor Article 207 explicitly forbid nations from exercising their right to undertake negotiations. Article 207 is about the Common Commercial Policy, but these negotiations aren't for the Common Commercial Policy, they're for our own independent trade. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/...08E207:en:HTMLQuote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
So no there is no violation, nor is there any reason to care. As for amicability anyone who mistakenly believes they are the only ones who we will talk to need to be immediately disabused of such ignorance. You don't go into negotiations talking just to one partner, that would get you the worst possible deal.
Doesn't seem particularly relevant to the matter at hand. Japan is saying that its businesses in the UK would like for the UK to not fuck things up for them after they've moved there and established themselves, often with encouragement from the UK. That's not exactly a crazy or hypocritical thing to say. Anyone who thinks it is, is probably crazy.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
It's not crazy for the Japanese to want that. It's also not crazy that a country may democratically determine its own future is different to the one Japan wants. There is surely zero chance that Britain will remain within the EU Customs Union, even if we remain in the Single Market. None of the EFTA nations are in the Customs Union and the entire bloody point of voting to leave was so that we could sign our own deals. So scratch that as a complete non-starter even if the Japanese want it.
The others I'm open to. But we may as well be in the EU itself if we're going to be in the Customs Union.
No it is not strange at all, it's project Reality.
Project Reality is us doing quite nicely, life going on and opportunities galore going forwards.
Ah after the lies before the referendum you got a real taste for more lies I see.
Life is going on and there are opportunities galore.
The lies were Project Bullshit. WWIII, a great DIY recession, interest rates going up, no friends or allies ... all lies.
By the way, the Australians meant they are interested in a trade deal as soon as possible after they have agreed one with the EU. Back of the queue it is for you Britishers. :D
Fat chance, considering the EU is constitutionally incapable of making an agreement.
Considering the fact that the EU has trade agreements with various countries and blocs I must assume you're working with some very specific and peculiar definitions for 20% of the words you used in that sentence.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade