Brexit

Labor needs to grow some balls and agree to an early election

 

A remark which clearly demonstrates your ignorance of UK politics. Labour WANT a general election yes, but not on Boris's terms. If they agreed to an election now, Boris can dictate the date of it and he could choose to hold it AFTER 31/10/19 in which case the UK has already crashed out of the EU without a deal. No right-minded politician would be that stupid as to fall into that trap. No-one but no-one trusts Boris anymore - he's an evil, lying toerag !!!

 

Oh! Labour along with the total rag bag of parties made up of Lib Dems (Whatever happened to their absolute promise to abolish tuition fees by the way) do I believe have balls alright.
The only trouble is that they are Snow Balls.
And Snow Balls soon melt when there is any heat at all.
So you are quite right there Vanilla.
Along with the Snow Flakes who have Snow Balls as well, all will be gone when the Snow Plough gets them.
And the Snow Ploughs name is?

BORIS JOHNSTON of course!

Cheers!

 

Lolz

.......or.....

you all just got steam rolled by this guy and it will take you 2 months to work it out

Not that the 31st of October is all that definitive, but it seems all Boris has to do now is shift all focus back to the border control side of the argument

 

Brexit bombshell: How Johnson will 'sabotage' Remoaners surrender bill and veto exit delay

Or this, if forced to ask for an extension, submit a nonsensical reason for it

 

Brexit will prove to be an unmitigated political and economic disaster. TheEU has been a positive force in a continent that has a long and sordid history of divisiveness and discord. Were Texas or Mississippi to leave the union, everyone would be worse off, but especially the residents of the exiting states.

 

You have already had the polical disaster over the last three years

 

No, make that nine years - ever since the scumbag 'nasty party' came to power.

 

Booze

Sorry but you constantly come across as deeply ill-informed there is no depth to anything you have said here.

To educate a person about something you first need to be informed on that subject you have shown no such knowledge and what’s worse seem disinclined to learn anything about it.

 

VG

Sorry but even the headline of the article you cited makes it clear

Norway’s payments linked to its relationship with the EU are around two thirds of what the UK pays per head of population, before money comes back. Comparing payments after money comes back is difficult, but seems to narrow the gap still further.



So the UK would still be paying in and following the rules but having little or no say over those rules – even the Norwegian Prime Minister can’t work out why the UK would want that -

The prime minister of Norway asked why the U.K. would want a relationship with the EU that's similar to the one her country has with the bloc. Erna Solberg pointed out that it would mean Britain continuing to abide by the four EU freedoms, including freedom of movement, as well as having no decision-making power in Brussels. "Then I should just ask why … should you leave the EU if you’re accepting that?" she said.

https://www.politico.eu/article/norwegian-pm-uk-cannot-cherry-pick-eu-membership/

So you are in favour of a Norway deal?

 

VG

I’ve covered it throughout this thread you just need to read it to learn about my views of it.

Your own views seem ill thought through or simplistic you would be better off reading the posts in the thread and answering the criticisms already presented rather than putting forward these simplistic offerings.

I mean you seem to think that the only impact of a hard boarder would be an adverse impact on UK tourism with an upside in there been far more jobs in the public sector.

Really that’s it?

You also come out with some rather mad statements like

Where did you get that from what makes you think that?

I mean I really wish you would READ THE POSTS

This has been covered numerous times so what the fuck are you basing this statement on?

Then as said there is the incredibly simplistic

I mean there is no way you could make this statement if you had read the post in this thread because all of these things have been covered and these views been shown wanting can you please READ THE POSTS

You also mentioned the May governments ‘temporary’ WTO schedule but can you explain what that would mean? Well guess what it’s already been covered so why don’t you READ THE FUCKING POSTS

Also you keep using the same fucking thing as a ‘joke’

Well we have been through the dumb Y2K thing at least TWICE before and how it doesn’t work in relation to Brexit the first time been back in post 464 do you ever read what people say?


PLEASE READ THE POSTS


Why do you seem incapable of debating honestly?

 

VG

OK so to reply in simple terms but all covered in more detail elsewhere (you just have to go back and read it).

Hard boarder – disruption to trade – disruption to ‘just in time’ manufacturing – encourages companies to move

Negotiating trade deals is better form a position of power and influence which Brexit has already diminished and will do hugely if it goes through especially with a hard Brexit. They can take years.

Regulations most of the people pushing for Brexit are right wing neoliberals that wish to get rid of regulations that stand in the way of profits but are detrimental to most people, like environmental and workers’ rights regulations. For export reasons we will need to keep and follow the regulations for products we sell to the EU.

The government proposed WTO tariff schedules would be disastrous for a lot of UK companies and make the negotiating of trade deals harder.

I don’t believe any country on earth does trade solely through WTO.

 

VG

The question is why do I (and others) have to keep repeating ourselves because you ate too lazy to read other peoples posts and what is the point of us repeating stuff when you are never going to read it?

 

VG

So again - why do you think a Brexit especially a hard Brexit will be good for the UK economy?

I mean no rational person that has looked at what Brexit (especially) a hard Brexit and not thought it would have an adverse effect on the UK economy. With most of them saying that while the short term shock will be bad the real adverse effect will only become clear in the medium and long term.

Even leavers that once said that everything was going to be fine like David Davis “There will be no downside to Brexit only a considerable upside’ now admits there will be pain although on no evidence he is hoping it will only be short term pain although Jacob Rees-Mogg has admitted that the benefits of leaving the EU may not be felt for 50 years or not even then. And Farage is on record as saying the British people will be worse off if we leave the EU.

And the main economists used by leavers Patrick Minford has agreed that the outcome of Brexit would mean that the U.K. automotive, manufacturing and agricultural sectors would most likely be devastated or destroyed.

 

Oh, for like the 4th time, payments to those individual eu countries are voluntary. You are adding part of their foreign aid to their EEA contributiins then trying to claim britain would be paying 2/3 of that

You totally misrepresented that.

Other excerpts:

"Solberg said there would be both disadvantages and advantages if the U.K. were to join the EEA, which also includes Iceland and Liechtenstein:


“The EEA is the only organization in which Norway is a super power. Losing that is of course of [big] importance — then Britain becomes a super power in that organization,” she joked.

 

So, "Read the posts" four times including one with swearing in that post again to avoid showing everyone you dont know what a hard brexit actually means.

5 points, or a single paragraph to show us what you think a hard brexit means, its not that hard.

 

Oh, there it is. See, I told you so, you have no Idea what a hard Brexit means

67 pages in this thread, 3 years since the referendum, and this is what we get from you?


"Negotiating trade deals is better form a position of power and influence which Brexit has already diminished and will do hugely if it goes through especially with a hard Brexit"

So your definition of the trade aspect of a hard brexit is it would be hugely diminished especially with a hard brexit

Lolz

And your definition of a hard brexit when it comes to product standards is "right wing neoliberals that wish to get rid of regulations that stand in the way of profits"

Oi

See, told you so, you have no idea what a hard brexit means

 

VG

The question is why do I (and others) have to keep repeating ourselves because you are too lazy to read other peoples posts and what is the point of us repeating stuff when you are never going to read it?

 

VG

OK so to reply in simple terms but all covered in more detail elsewhere (you just have to go back and read it).

Hard boarder – disruption to trade – disruption to ‘just in time’ manufacturing – encourages companies to move

Negotiating trade deals is better form a position of power and influence which Brexit has already diminished and will do hugely if it goes through especially with a hard Brexit. They can take years.

Regulations most of the people pushing for Brexit are right wing neoliberals that wish to get rid of regulations that stand in the way of profits but are detrimental to most people, like environmental and workers’ rights regulations. For export reasons we will need to keep and follow the regulations for products we sell to the EU.

The government proposed WTO tariff schedules would be disastrous for a lot of UK companies and make the negotiating of trade deals harder.

I don’t believe any country on earth does trade solely through WTO.

 

VG

So again - why do you think a Brexit especially a hard Brexit will be good for the UK economy?