Excuses, excuses. It was supposed to be any Brexit that was going to be harmful but I guess you're rowing back on that prediction now?Originally Posted by Hazir
Glad to see you admit you were wrong. Only took a few years.
Excuses, excuses. It was supposed to be any Brexit that was going to be harmful but I guess you're rowing back on that prediction now?
Glad to see you admit you were wrong. Only took a few years.
Brexit is only not harmful if you consider vassal status an improvement.
Congratulations America
We're not having either vassal status or harm though.
Aside from the belief in unicorns you have there is nothing to dispel the notion that this is the bleak choice you will have to make soon. You either 'take back' control and suffer the consequences economically, or you accept vassal status in which case you may do well.
Congratulations America
I would not be so certain this is the FO being shitty. China may very well feel that it is the People's Republic that decides who of their citizens is allowed to use those 'rescue flights'.
Seems like it indeed is the PRC putting its foot down over this.
Last edited by Hazir; 01-29-2020 at 03:55 PM.
Congratulations America
Well, this is it. The EP has accepted the WA, so ratification has entered the bureacratic stage. in 52 hours and 30 minutes the UK will no longer be a member of the EU.
Congratulations America
At 153 pages long, the Brexit Begins thread is nearing its conclusion.
In a decade or so I hope I'll be starting a Brexit Ends thread, as this little England realises the folly of going it alone, that it's better to be a part of something bigger, and starts the process to rejoin the EU.
Probably about the same time that Canadians realise the folly of going it alone, that it's better to be a part of something bigger, and start the process to join the USA.At 153 pages long, the Brexit Begins thread is nearing its conclusion.
In a decade or so I hope I'll be starting a Brexit Ends thread, as this little England realises the folly of going it alone, that it's better to be a part of something bigger, and starts the process to rejoin the EU.
Once we're out, barring disaster, I don't think anyone moderate on either side is going to want to relive all this and have a hokey-cokey Brexit.
Today is our last full day of being part of the EU.
Positive signs that we have the right PM for the forthcoming trade talks.
Twitter Link
After three years of evidence to the opposite RandBlade still believes that the threat of walking out is going somewhere.
We'll see, the last time De Pfeffel negotiated he gave us NI, no telling what he's going to give us after Brexit.
Congratulations America
Can you help me understand why we'd want to make trade with our biggest and closest trade partner more difficult?
I'm still truly lost by all this; what, glaringly obvious benefit am I missing?
By the way; tomorrow is your last full day of being in the EU. As with everything about Brexit, it means what we say it means.
Congratulations America
I don't want to make it more difficult, but if its a consequence then I can live with it. The priority is not making trade with our biggest and closest trading partner more difficult, the priority is making our own decisions with trade with our trading partners as easy as possible within those bounds. Preferably with mutual recognition rather than alignment but if the EU isn't prepared to accept mutual recognition then so be it.
That's like asking a grown up why they don't live with their mum, dad, siblings, nieces, nephews etc - why would they want to make engaging with their biggest and closest family relationships more difficult? Reality is people want to have their own home and not one communal family home for the same extended family. That doesn't mean you don't have good relations with your family just because you have your own home.
Today is our last full day. Tomorrow we leave at 11pm so for 1 hour of tomorrow we are out.
I still don't understand
If trade does become more difficult, what's the actual benefit? Is it that even if the outcome is worse, we had "full" "control" of the negotiations, rather than partial (yet significant), collaborative "control" like we currently have?
Last edited by gogobongopop; 01-30-2020 at 11:40 AM.
To understand him you should realize he honestly believes that the UK is an equal in the relationship with the EU. Over the years he has consistently shown that he does not grasp the difference between absolute and relative numbers. He thinks that 80 billion is is 80 billion and that's the end of the discussion. He does not imagine that parties could see the amount in relation to their size.
Congratulations America
I always took him as one who will latch onto an idea and stick with it, no matter how absurd it becomes. His mental gymnastics getting crazier and crazier, to the point that he would eat actual dogshit if it meant the other side having to smell his breath. A point the leavers aren't far from.
Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 01-30-2020 at 12:45 PM.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
On the 31st of January the UK will be a full member for 24 hours. That is a complete day. The 31st is tomorrow. Today is the 30th.
Congratulations America
Don't be pathetic trying to claim some absurd timezone superiority.
If you go by your GMT-1 timezone yes, but we don't we have GMT. We leave at 23:00 GMT on the 31 January that is 23 hours in the EU and 1 hour out of it. Tomorrow is your last full day with us, but today is our last full day in.
The benefit is not trade with the EU. The benefit is control over our domestic laws and regulations etc - and yes trade with other nations that we can sign deals with too.I still don't understand
If trade does become more difficult, what's the actual benefit? Is it that even if the outcome is worse, we had "full" "control" of the negotiations, rather than partial (yet significant), collaborative "control" like we currently have?
If you were only judging by trade with the EU then you'd want to stay in but we're looking at a bigger picture than that.
But we've always had control over out domestic laws and regulations, and we trade with over 70 countries. Why risk/sacrifice frictionless trade with our biggest market to trade with maybe a couple more countries, assuming that's the plan?
r
We don't have control over our domestic laws and regulations since many are now set at an EU level.
As for trade, we should risk frictionless trade with a diminishing market because it is a shrinking market that takes a minority of our exports and the rest of the world (which already forms the majority of our trade) is more important and has more potential.
Yes we do have control; we just make some our laws collaboratively. We vote(d) for people who helped shaped those laws; we had a powerfully proportional voice in those laws; and unless you can explain why those laws have been to our determent rather than our benefit, and why our own parliament will do a better job, you're basing your position on some kind of faith.
And no we shouldn't risk that, when the EU market constitutes the vast majority of our exports. We certainly shouldn't risk it when you can't put forward a tangible benefit.
I realise we've had these arguments before, and there's little point going round in circles, but I thought by now, after all this time, you'd have a stronger argument.
Collaboratively is not us setting it. The laws can't be reversed at our elections either.
Plus your premise is flawed. The EU market does not constitute the vast majority of our exports.
What do you define as vast majority? A simple majority is anything over 50%, I'm assuming you mean perhaps 60-75% to be a vast majority? Reality is nowhere close to that! If you're starting from a flawed premise it shouldn't be surprising you reach a flawed conclusion.
46.6% of our exports are to the EU, compared with our biggest nearest market USA at 13.4%, followed by China at 5.7%. I'd consider that a "vast majority" in comparison, but happy to concede on semantics if it makes you happy. You can clearly see my point with those figures.
And yes it is "us" setting it. Our parliament makes laws collaboratively within government, White Hall, the Lords and parliament itself. The EU just makes laws collaboratively with a different set of players. It's still "control". Our own Government said in its Brexit white paper that "parliament has remained sovereign throughout our membership of the EU." It might not "feel" like it, and it's a wonderfully persuasive slogan, but it has.
Last edited by gogobongopop; 01-30-2020 at 04:21 PM.
45% by my figures with supposedly the best possible trade deal and the trend over time is for it to continue falling.
The EU's set of players is not us and not elected at our election where we debate policies and make a choice.
You've posted a partial quote, our own Government said in its white paper that Parliament has remained sovereign because we could leave when we chose to do so. The only way to exercise our sovereignty is to leave.
We already have sovereignty but need to leave to exercise it?
Now I'm really confused!
And we vote for our MEPs, and have every opportunity to find out what they stand for, so I'm not sure what your point is or why it's been such a bad thing for us.
Yes, interesting isn't it? These Brexiteers telling us that they are only leaving the EU but not Europe. But when you try to fathom as to why they need to leave the EU it's because they loathe to be European.
But for heavens sake don't tell him he's just a run of the mill xenophobe, because he's a real true blue globalist. If the rest of us can't quite see how a country the size of the UK can be anything else than a rule taker; well, seeing reality is our problem, not his.
Congratulations America
You're not confused you're starting to get it.
We had sovereignty because we could leave but if we didn't leave we had to go along with whatever the EU decided. But since we hadn't chosen to leave that was tacitly our choice. In order to exercise our sovereignty we needed to leave and make our own decisions.
I don't think Randy is xenophobic or loathes to be European, for the record. I think he believes we'll be more prosperous outside the EU; I've just never been persuaded by his arguments.
No idea what you're talking about, I've never said I loathe to be European. If you can't see how a country the size of the UK can be anything else than a rule taker then step back and enjoy the ride. You'll see soon enough.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote