Meat Wad

Brexit, WTF

Recommended Posts

For those that don't venture into PA

Quote

Theresa May is to call-off Tuesday's crucial vote on her Brexit deal in the face of what was expected to be a significant defeat by Tory rebels.

Government sources have said the prime minister is set to tell MPs about the delay in a statement at 15:30 GMT.

Downing Street had been insisting the vote would go ahead.

The pound fell sharply in response, shedding 0.5% versus the US dollar to stand at $1.26. Against the euro, the pound was 0.8% down at 1.10 euros.

Mrs May's Commons statement will be followed by a statement from Commons leader Andrea Leadsom - and then a statement from the Brexit secretary Stephen Barclay on Article 50 - the legal mechanism taking the UK out of the EU on 29 March.

This could be telling.......... ??

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46509288

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As another data point to the comments above, as a Brit living in France we have had nothing but sympathy from the French people. No animosity at all. The French foreign minister made it clear from the outset that Brits living in France would not have any of their existing rights removed by the French government, even though they would not make a formal announcement of this until all negotiations are complete. Nevertheless, they have kept their promise and we collected our permanent residency cards this morning.

Regarding travel, we have crossed the channel regularly for the last 15 years, and the British have always checked passports in Portsmouth, and continue to do so. The French have had sporadic spot checks over the years, but now have routine checks in response to the fact that non-EU travelers are surrounding the ports. This started before the Brexit vote, so is unrelated as far as I am aware.

Brexit is not seen as much of an issue here. It is occasionally discussed, but is not seen as being particularly significant to Europe as a whole, or the French peoples place in it. I've never met a single French person who wants to leave the EU. On the contrary, they very clearly blame the domestic politicians for their grievances, recognising that the EU doesn't impose any laws on the country that their politician don't approve. The way the EU actually works, with a balance of power between the domestic governments and the EU parliament, with the EU civil service doing the admin, seems to be widely understood by the majority of French people I have spoken to, whereas it is rare to speak to a Brit who understands how the EU works. The general consensus I've heard is that losing the British monetary contribution is not problematic, but the British contribution to law making, and particularly in the future defense developments, will be sorely missed.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, The Q said:

Ah that old chestnut that the SNP likes to quote, 

For convienence the UNITED kingdom, planers divided the North sea into sectors northern and southern they did this by putting a horizontal line on the map of the north sea from Berwick it convieniently not going through any oil fields at the time.

This is NOT the border at sea, between England and Scotland, international law is that the sea border is the continuation of the general angle of the land border, put a ruler on the map on that line and see what happens. if you add the little kink in for Berwick being in England, that puts acording to some estimates I've seen of the English sea area being just 60 miles off of the coast at Aberdeen. 

On the west coast the line goes down past Cumbria till it hits the Ilse of Man's water border.

 Most of the oil coming ashore in Scotland actually comes from the Norwegian sector, there being a huge under sea trench off the Norway coast, it being therefore cheaper to pump it to Scotland.

To be taken off of the supposed money coming from Scotland would also be the fact that the people of Scotland are guarrenteed 10% more spending per person by UK government than those in England, a useful amount of money the SNP forgets to mention when proclaiming how good they are at running the Scotland.

There are many other benefits the SNP forget to mention, from the spending required on the military,  to odd ones like the national Broadcaster the BBC, heavily subsidies Scottish broad casting. The purchasing power of 55 million people in England  somewhat out dwarfs the purchasing power of 5 million people in Scotland..

Not that it matters but there are two possible ways of allocating offshore mineral and oil exploration rights.  By far the most likely is "median line principle" . This means drawing a dividing line on which all points are the same distance from the Scottish and rest of the UK (RUK) coastline. This is the method which was used when the North Sea was originally divided up between the UK and other countries in the 1960s.  Most importantly it was the basis of the treaty signed between the UK and Norway in 1965.. The median line approach was also used to determine the boundary between Scotland and the rest of the UK for fisheries after devolution in 1999. It is the same principle as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Under the median line principle, 90% of UK North Sea oil would accrue to Scotland.  Using the alternative method, 100% of UK North Sea olil would accrue to Scotland.

It doesnt matter because Scotland (wisely) decided to remain part of the UK. They also wisely voted to stay part of Europe and I dont blame them for being a bit naffed with a bunch of chinless wonders like Rees- Mogg blowing up the economy by wanting to split from Europe just so that they can sing "Rule Britannia" at the Royal Albert Hall and go back to their London townhouse to drink port and celebrate keeping foreigners at bay once again. 

You must admit the Scots are entitled to a certain sense of irony.  After the campaigning on the benefits of being part of a larger unified economy, they voted to agree to stay a part of the UK...only to see the English turn about face and commit economic hare-kiri by voting against staying part of Europe.

The spending on the Military is not very relevant. I would argue that Scotland doesnt need a military (although they supply at least one very fine regiment)...because nobody in their right mind would want to conquer Scotland. The climate is terrible, the food is awful and the people are incomprehensible. The Romans knew exactly what they were doing. Not only, did they not want to conquer Scotland (it was perfectly obvious to them that it could produce neither olives or wine) but they built Hadrians wall to keep the Scottish out.   They also created a free trade zone which included England, Gaul, Spain and Italy and created a boom in prosperity in Europe.  

Apparently the English dont mind being in a free trade zone with Gaul....its the French they cant abide.;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

March 29 is fast approaching.  How close to the brink will they come before they bailout?

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, mad said:

There must be an echo in here, that's exactly what I posted a few minutes ago. :wacko:

Sorry...normally don't do that as very annoying.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the rest of the world have seen this as a bit of sideshow todate and are now starting to wake up to the potential of things badly deteriorating regardless of the outcome. Civil unrest like this makes enemy's of neighbours and even family members.

Time for politicians to put self interest aside and sort it otherwise this could get very ugly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Sailabout said:

Italy not mentioned yet, its economy has stood still since the euro killed its export business

nobody there thinks they have a bright future, I have worked for Italians pre and post the Euro

What a crock of shit - Italy has always been a complete financial klusterfuck.  If it weren't for the mob money, Italy would have folded up and closed more than 50 years ago.  Same goes for Greece and to some extent Spain.  Why do you think those 3 countries had to cook their books severely to enter the euro?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2018 at 8:00 AM, captain_crunch said:

Yeah, right!  Try telling the Greeks and the Spanish that the EU is failing. The reality is that both countries saw the advantages of EU membership as being so compelling that they were willing to endure the suffering caused by extreme austerity to stay in.  Compared to other countries in the EU, the UK should have a relatively easy exit path because the UK does not participate in the Euro, but the UK has become the poster child for all the reasons why leaving is a bad idea. 

Spain faced the Catalan separatist movement and the UK faced the Scottish separatist movement.  Both movements failed at least in part because of the desire of the separatists to stay in the EU.  The EU made it clear in both cases that any newly created countries would have to go through a lengthy process to join.  Now with the UK poised to exit the EU, there is new motivation for Scotland (and Northern Ireland) to seek independence.

I am an American, but I feel strongly about this for several reasons.  I have a Greek cousin who now works in the London branch of an American financial institution.  I have a grandfather who was from Leeds.  His mother was Scottish and his father was English.  During the referendum on Scottish independence, I felt strongly that Scotland should remain part of the UK.  I felt my loyalty was betrayed when the UK voted to leave the EU, especially given that Scotland voted to remain.

WTF?  you are an American and have NO dog in that fight.  Some faint family connection to these countries do NOT make you Greek , English or Scottish

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Christian said:

What a crock of shit - Italy has always been a complete financial klusterfuck.  If it weren't for the mob money, Italy would have folded up and closed more than 50 years ago.  Same goes for Greece and to some extent Spain.  Why do you think those 3 countries had to cook their books severely to enter the euro?

the north is wealthy, have you ever been there??

If half the country is doing all the work and the gdp was same and larger than the UK you can see your argument holds no sway

When the wall goes up it will be just under Florence to Rimini below that is north africa, the mafia is a net drain on the gov

Italy has proven it can run without government or finances, nobody else in the EU can do that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sailabout said:

the north is wealthy, have you ever been there??

If half the country is doing all the work and the gdp was same and larger than the UK you can see your argument holds no sway

the North line is from Florence to Rimini below that is north africa

The north has pockets of wealth - but the country as a whole is fucked up financially - always has been and probably always will be.  The real wealth is actually in what you call North Africa - specifically Sicily.  But that is the unofficial economy and not a part of the country's finances.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Christian said:

The north has pockets of wealth - but the country as a whole is fucked up financially - always has been and probably always will be.  The real wealth is actually in what you call North Africa - specifically Sicily.  But that is the unofficial economy and not a part of the country's finances.   

tell me, how do you see wealth in Sicily?

would that be all the global business that started there?

other than plum tomatoes what do they have?

Does it look like Singapore these days?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

Italy has proven it can run without government or finances, nobody else in the EU can do that

Belgium actually did it for 2 years and their financials improved.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No majority in Ireland either. Everything requires consensous. Has been a generally calm government marked by conservative financial management and progressive social policy. Few exceptions to that like homelessness 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look guys, there is a very sound reason why us Brits need to leave the European Union. Come the next pan European war it would, in effect, be a civil war, akin to yours in the 19th century. If Britain were still a member we would be forced to pick a side and get involved while the good ol’ USofA looks on, turns its back and carries on rimming the Pacific.

When we leave the EU, Britain and the good ol’ USofA will continue to foster their ‘special relationship’, enabling you guys to Lend Lease all your military hardware, thus bankrupting our economy for the second time and then, just in the nick of time, send in  troops to use Britain as a springboard for the invasion of Europe, defeat the bad guys and take all the credit, again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was never one for watching soap opera's on telly but this one is lining up for an Oscar, Golden Globe & Golden Raspberry all in one :lol:

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Christian said:

WTF?  you are an American and have NO dog in that fight.  Some faint family connection to these countries do NOT make you Greek , English or Scottish

A strong Europe is in America's interest.  In the past, the US has counted the UK as our strongest ally.  We aren't going to stand back and watch the UK shoot itself in the foot without saying something.

Our own version of Brexit was the election of Donald Trump.  Do you really want to continue to ignore the experts and make such a mistake?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, captain_crunch said:

A strong Europe is in America's interest.  In the past, the US has counted the UK as our strongest ally.  We aren't going to stand back and watch the UK shoot itself in the foot without saying something.

Our own version of Brexit was the election of Donald Trump.  Do you really want to continue to ignore the experts and make such a mistake?

they need the UK as an ally and that is only really going to work when its out of the EU.

Joining a trading block years ago was a good idea, I dont know what you would call it now but how come no other trading block in the world needs a whole infrastructure of paid idiots on a gravy train?

The UK v EU is like the USA v China, how can they lose a trade war when they are down millions a day?

the EU is desparate they dont leave as they help fund the ponzi scheme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^ Excuse me, but the EU and NATO are composed of the same set of countries with a few exceptions.  Anything that creates friction and weakens links between western European nations is not good for NATO and not good for the US (regardless of what our current president thinks).

Regarding our current president, you should learn from our own misadventure and not be led astray by populists and nationalists .

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, captain_crunch said:

A strong Europe is in America's interest. 

This thread has been very relaxed and comfortable outside that PA room until that bit of total horseshit. Trump is the "divide and conquer" man and he is doing everything possible to see a Brexit happen by denegrating individul EU nations bit by bit. He is a sneaky cunt selling his USA/me only domestic agenda, in this case climate change.

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com.au/trump-mocks-emmanuel-macron-over-paris-yellow-vest-riots-2018-12/amp

He couldn't give a fuck about Europe, his focus is not being fucked by China. He doesn't a rat's arse about say a Airbus factory in Wales post Brexit over say Boeing and Co.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

 

Joining a trading block years ago was a good idea, I dont know what you would call it now but how come no other trading block in the world needs a whole infrastructure of paid idiots on a gravy train?

 

I think that it is Called the United STATES of America... have you seen Washington's whole infrastructure of paid idiots on a gravy train?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The Q said:

I think that it is Called the United STATES of America... have you seen Washington's whole infrastructure of paid idiots on a gravy train?

sure but thats one cental gov, every EU country is paying for 2 central govs

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

sure but thats one cental gov, every EU country is paying for 2 central govs

I think you dismissing each commonwealth's, Territories or district's  state Authorities who can raise taxes, have police forces etc just like the EU. The only thing the EU doesn't have is a overall miltary and  federal police. though there are attempts by the EU to have both...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, captain_crunch said:

^^ Excuse me, but the EU and NATO are composed of the same set of countries with a few exceptions.  Anything that creates friction and weakens links between western European nations is not good for NATO and not good for the US (regardless of what our current president thinks).

Regarding our current president, you should learn from our own misadventure and not be led astray by populists and nationalists .

 

 

why are you joining putting the EU and NATO in one pot, they serve 2 different functions.

once the UK is out I think it might be a big trading partner of Russia and the USA, hence if the EU was formed to stop those Euro clowns from fighting each other then UK and Russia can only be good for the world

perhaps let Russia take over Germany then we will have world peace forever, Germany being the aggressor and a 2 time loser

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sailabout said:

why are you joining putting the EU and NATO in one pot, they serve 2 different functions.

once the UK is out I think it might be a big trading partner of Russia and the USA, hence if the EU was formed to stop those Euro clowns from fighting each other then UK and Russia can only be good for the world

:lol: in what, chemical weapons?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jack_sparrow said:

This thread has been very relaxed and comfortable outside that PA room until that bit of total horseshit. Trump is the "divide and conquer" man and he is doing everything possible to see a Brexit happen by denegrating individul EU nations bit by bit. He is a sneaky cunt selling his USA/me only domestic agenda, in this case climate change.

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com.au/trump-mocks-emmanuel-macron-over-paris-yellow-vest-riots-2018-12/amp

He couldn't give a fuck about Europe, his focus is not being fucked by China. He doesn't a rat's arse about say a Airbus factory in Wales post Brexit over say Boeing and Co.

Despite the fact that your statement is a rebuttal to one of my previous comments, I actually agree.

If you need any proof of what a bad idea Brexit is, just consider the fact that the only prominent politician in the United States who has spoken in favor of Brexit is Donald Trump!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, captain_crunch said:

Despite the fact that your statement is a rebuttal to one of my previous comments, I actually agree.

If you need any proof of what a bad idea Brexit is, just consider the fact that the only prominent politician in the United States who has spoken in favor of Brexit is Donald Trump!

 

No surprises there! 

Image result for trump and farage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

why are you joining putting the EU and NATO in one pot, they serve 2 different functions.

once the UK is out I think it might be a big trading partner of Russia and the USA, hence if the EU was formed to stop those Euro clowns from fighting each other then UK and Russia can only be good for the world

perhaps let Russia take over Germany then we will have world peace forever, Germany being the aggressor and a 2 time loser

The only certain thing about a post-Brexit UK is that it will be weaker both in terms of economic strength and diplomatic influence.

When asked when UK citizens could expect to see the benefits of Brexit, Jacob Rees-Mogg replied 50 years!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, captain_crunch said:

The only certain thing about a post-Brexit UK is that it will be weaker both in terms of economic strength and diplomatic influence.

When asked when UK citizens could expect to see the benefits of Brexit, Jacob Rees-Mogg replied 50 years!

joined with Russia, those predictions might be different?

its runs a trade deficit with the EU, and cant trade with many other countries that it might like to, hard to see how it can lose that fight

the EU will try every trick in the book to kill the banking and insurance business but who trusts anyone in Europe, they seem to forget that

Where do all the Russian billionaires live and bank??

The Greek ship owners

and so on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

perhaps let Russia take over Germany then we will have world peace forever, Germany being the aggressor and a 2 time loser

You say some good stuff ..but that is absolutely loopy territory. Your slant on Germany dredges up history but doesn't ask the question why? You are channeling people long dead who fucked up post WWI and so encouraging a repeat. We have already had one in WWII, fools like you want another one just to prove you are right or wrong? 

Russia for a century or more and to this day have craved world domination or position of influence but economicaly was never and still is today behind the eightball. If you accept the fact the world is full of murdering cunts and only seperated by degree where do you place Russia on that Totum Pole?

You reakon a nation that is at the top of that pole be it civilians shot down in aircraft or by any objective measure should be handed the keys of Mercedes and Volkswagen and the world will be better off?

Lazy self indulgent, privileged people like you in the old days were caught out and burnt at the stake or just had your heads cut off behind the barn before you could do too much damage in the village. Unfortunately in the modern age you survive and if vocal enough become influencers. In some cases society benefits from that, in some cases it doesn't. You belong to the latter.

Any chance there is a guy in your village who owns a axe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

You say some good stuff ..but that is absolutely loopy territory. Your slant on Germany dredges up history but doesn't ask the question why? You are channeling people long dead who fucked up post WWI and so encouraging a repeat. We have already had one in WWII, fools like you want another one just to prove you are right or wrong? 

Russia for a century or more and to this day have craved world domination or position of influence but economicaly was never and still is today behind the eightball. If you accept the fact the world is full of murdering cunts and only seperated by degree where do you place Russia on that Totum Pole?

You reakon a nation that is at the top of that pole be it civilians shot down in aircraft or by any objective measure should be handed the keys of Mercedes and Volkswagen and the world will be better off?

Lazy self indulgent, privileged people like you in the old days were caught out and burnt at the stake or just had your heads cut off behind the barn before you could do too much damage in the village. Unfortunately in the modern age you survive and if vocal enough become influencers. In some cases society benefits from that, in some cases it doesn't. You belong to the latter.

Any chance there is a guy in your village who owns a axe?

I was pointing out why the EU was formulated, it was to prevent war in the Europe. Remind me who started them in the modern era?

Some would say the EU was started so they could loan money to every EU country so they could afford to by German cars...

I dont see the typical Russian and an aggressor who wants world domination but I havnt met them all, bump into to few sailing these days
Did a regatta in korea a while ago, plenty of Russian boats and crew, they seemed normal sailing beer drinkers to me without any inferior or superior complexes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

I was pointing out why the EU was formulated, it was to prevent war in the Europe. Remind me who started them in the modern era?

Some would say the EU was started so they could loan money to every EU country so they could afford to by German cars...

I dont see the typical Russian and an aggressor who wants world domination but I havnt met them all, bump into to few sailing these days
Did a regatta in korea a while ago, plenty of Russian boats and crew, they seemed normal sailing beer drinkers to me?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

I was pointing out why the EU was formulated, it was to prevent war in the Europe.

No you didn't, you canned Germany and in passing said if the EU was formulated to prevent war which even poor blind Freddy knows that not to be the case. You went further suggesting to prevent war the UK should Brexit, Russia takes over from Germany, Russia and the UK share the same bed and the world is dandy 

1 hour ago, Sailabout said:

once the UK is out I think it might be a big trading partner of Russia and the USA, hence if the EU was formed to stop those Euro clowns from fighting each other then UK and Russia can only be good for the world

perhaps let Russia take over Germany then we will have world peace forever, Germany being the aggressor and a 2 time loser

You might also like to know vodka is just not for breakfast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, captain_crunch said:

When asked when UK citizens could expect to see the benefits of Brexit, Jacob Rees-Mogg replied 50 years!

The old story of those who have never spent a day outdoors getting sweaty but with a microphone con the ones who do into thinking there is a magic pudding to their woes socially and or financially. This Rees Mogg guy is channeling Margaret Thatcher but 20X smarter and doesn't need a dress, well so far unseen. The irony is with Brexit is the political extremes of each of the major major parties are aligned. This is unchartered territory and is delivering as expected.

A catastrofuck.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

The old story of those who have never spent a day outdoors getting sweaty but with a microphone con the ones who do into thinking there is a magic pudding to their woes socially and or financially. This Rees Mogg guy is channeling Margaret Thatcher but 20X smarter and doesn't need a dress, well so far unseen. The irony is with Brexit is the political extremes of each of the major major parties are aligned. This is unchartered territory and is delivering as expected.

A catastrofuck.

 

No other description is required.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jack_sparrow said:

No you didn't, you canned Germany and in passing said if the EU was formulated to prevent war which even poor blind Freddy knows that not to be the case. You went further suggesting to prevent war the UK should Brexit, Russia takes over from Germany, Russia and the UK share the same bed and the world is dandy 

You might also like to know vodka is just not for breakfast.

the EU was formulated to force a trading group to help prevent war by the politicians who at the time had experienced 2 wars and said never again.

Ted Heath on record saying that

Didnt you do history at school or was your teacher blind freddy

on the other hand...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sailabout said:

joined with Russia, those predictions might be different?

its runs a trade deficit with the EU, and cant trade with many other countries that it might like to, hard to see how it can lose that fight

the EU will try every trick in the book to kill the banking and insurance business but who trusts anyone in Europe, they seem to forget that

Where do all the Russian billionaires live and bank??

The Greek ship owners

and so on

I'm still trying to understand the logic here.

The Europeans are undemocratic and can't be trusted, so the UK should put its faith in Russia?

Perhaps I am taking this too seriously.  Perhaps it was actually intended as sarcasm.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, captain_crunch said:

I'm still trying to understand the logic here.

The Europeans are undemocratic and can't be trusted, so the UK should put its faith in Russia?

Perhaps I am taking this too seriously.  Perhaps it was actually intended as sarcasm.

 

That's why I'm staying out of this one.:wacko:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

the EU was formulated to force a trading group to help prevent war by the politicians who at the time had experienced 2 wars and said never again.

Didnt you do history at school or was your teacher blind freddy

 

History of you are jumping all over the place is easier to follow. First you say 

1 hour ago, Sailabout said:

I was pointing out why the EU was formulated, it was to prevent war in the Europe. Remind me who started them in the modern era?

Some would say the EU was started so they could loan money to every EU country so they could afford to by German cars...

You now say

31 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

the EU was formulated to force a trading group to help prevent war by the politicians who at the time had experienced 2 wars and said never again.

So you finally get to trading group which is the genisus of the EU, being industrial production, not preventing war.

That group was the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) comprising six European countries created after World War II to regulate their industrial production under a centralised authority. 

Your loopy theory that Brexit and the UK aligning with Russia both for economic advantage and preventing world war is as crazy as it fucking gets. 

Putting aside you war nonsence any objective analysis of the UK's economy indicates any ability to go it alone dissapeared with Thatcher's appearance 40 years ago if not a decade before that. Whether that was a good or bad thing is now irrelevent.

Those seeking to wind the clock back 40+ years have been watching too much Dr Who.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU (nee EEC) was sold o the public as a free trade area but designed by Monnet et al to be a European state. The French in particular have always wanted the EU to a rival to the USA. The EU has a long history of ignoring democratic decisions - the Irish have been forced to have repeated referendums to get the 'correct' result, the French had a referendum on the EU constitution and voted no so the same constitution was presented as the Lisbon treaty. The German gas deal with Russia is completely illegal under EU rules but nothing is, or will be, done about it.

I don't understand why Brexiteers are often described as extremist. 

Freedom of movement into the UK has pushed the wages if the unskilled down badly. The UK is the easiest country in Europe to move too and pays out welfare benefits much more easily to non-citizens than France or Germany. If the EU had moved an inch on paying benefits to EU immigrants the referendum would have voted to remain - the mythical Polish plumber can work in the UK and have child benefits paid into his Polish bank account for his children living in Poland as soon as he arrives in the UK.

I remember trying to get my French Carte de Sejour and being told I had the wrong translators stamp which wasn't required under EEC rules but the old saying:

The Germans make the rules, the British obey the rules, the French ignore the rules and Italians, Spanish and Greeks don't know what the rules are.

 

  • Like 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2018 at 6:21 AM, jack_sparrow said:

The "People Vote" or second referendum clearly scares the shit out of pro Brexits, despite going to great pains to nullify that fear.

The big problem with the campaigning for a second referendum and all the remain stuff was that it put negotiators in a poor position. It meant the EU side was "if we play hardball and force a really bad agreement that hurts both sides they'll vote not to leave, which is what we want." A better negotiating attitude would have been "this is happening no matter what, so lets behave like adults and work out the disentanglement that is best for everyone." There is no sign that happened of course.  Petulance and childishness were well on display on both sides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Expatriated said:

The German gas deal with Russia is completely illegal under EU rules but nothing is, or will be, done about it.

Source ? Its painfull, but completely illegal ? Good article; https://www.bloomberg.com/quicktake/russian-gas
But maybe to much thread drift of the Brexit.

Eu countries ignoring some referenda for various reasons, is more country politics then EU, think outside the conspiracy theory.
, Immigrants, as you point out, UK rules made the problem, not the EU rules.
I do not call Brexiteers extremist, only many of the arguments for it could have been reduced to lies with a 5 minutes google search.

20 minutes ago, Expatriated said:

The Germans make the rules, the British obey the rules, the French ignore the rules and Italians, Spanish and Greeks don't know what the rules are.

Good one, and the Dutch ? They just take profit from what ever rule there is or is not. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, JimC said:

Petulance and childishness were well on display on both sides.

Nah, the UK side wins IMHO. The only petulance of the EU was the Cherry picking photo of Macron.
What kind of deal would the EU have brought forward that would satisfy you ?
This deal brought stop to free movement of people, and the rest to be sorted out during the coming years. The backstop is a bit messy as no end to it, that should have been with an end date. I agree on that. But it is really  easy saying the EU is playing hard ball etc, no prove whatsoever, is so easy. They only stuck together, much to the wonder of some Brexiteers who thought to be able to deal with all countries separate.

If the Eu really wanted to play hard ball, they would have stopped the talks 1 year ago. Or would have said no to May visits just this morning to Eu politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, captain_crunch said:

I'm still trying to understand the logic here.

The Europeans are undemocratic and can't be trusted, so the UK should put its faith in Russia?

Perhaps I am taking this too seriously.  Perhaps it was actually intended as sarcasm.

 

a bit, yes

but trade deficit with the EU or possible surplus with Putin??

a free trade zone with Russia, UK and USA would be quite large and unlike the EU would be trade only without a Brussels micro managing everything thing from human rights to the size of a pint.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Sailabout said:

a bit, yes

but trade deficit with the EU or possible surplus with Putin??

a free trade zone with Russia, UK and USA would be quite large and unlike the EU would be trade only without a Brussels micro managing everything thing from human rights to the size of a pint.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pint

Quote

In 1824, the British parliament replaced all the various gallons with a new imperial gallon based on ten pounds of distilled water at 62 °F (16.667 °C) (277.42 cubic inches), from which the current UK pint is derived.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Expatriated said:

a) I don't understand why Brexiteers are often described as extremist. 

b) Freedom of movement into the UK has pushed the wages if the unskilled down badly...... etc.

 

a) they are because on the basis of doubtful and unsubstantiated claims (read flagrant lies, vilification of the EU and if's & maybe's) the easily led are fooled into the belief that the UK can return to the days when it was an empire.

b) It has been unequivocally proven that this statement is utter bollocks and that freedom of movement i.e immigration has actually been better for the UK economy iwo tax revenue and productivity.

That kind of thinking is exactly why a former welcoming, hospitable, sometimes well organized country is being burnt down to the ground while it's leaders are dancing around the fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gas deal is illegal because the price for Russian gas for Germany is about half that for Poland and re-exporting from Germany is prohibited in the contract.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Expatriated said:

The German gas deal with Russia is completely illegal under EU rules but nothing is, or will be, done about it.

Why illegal? Europe particularly Germany and including the UK (albeit small quantity) have been taking gas from Russia for years. The party most pissed off by recent expansion has been the US particularly under the Trump administration looking for consumers of their much increased LNG export capacity that has come from fracking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually weights and measures are defined by an international treaty which is metric, and controlled by scientists from all over the world via the International Bureau of Weights and Measures. Even the  strange American Measures are now controlled by comparison to standard metric measures. The Yanks having joined the metrification treaty originally for the Metre back in 1875, long before the UK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Expatriated said:

The gas deal is illegal because the price for Russian gas for Germany is about half that for Poland and re-exporting from Germany is prohibited in the contract.

As every country negotiate with Russia on that import this counts;
Thus, there is a systemic relationship between a country’s ability to procure non-Russian gas and the price it pays for Russian gas: countries with a lesser dependence on Russian gas pay less for that gas.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/thebakersinstitute/2017/08/24/lng-versus-russian-gas-in-central-and-eastern-europe-playing-poker-on-a-continental-scale/#
Figure-1-NG-AM-blog.jpg

You have a point with, why does not Germany exports his Russian gas to Poland, that is in the contract and if htat is illegal or not under Eu rules, can not find that at the moment, got a linky ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But but, UK is paying even less then Germany, how about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So one reason to get a Brexit is that the Eu is not working (separate deals of countries as example).
But that is because the Eu is not integrated enough to act like one costumer to Russia.
So to stay in you want more Eu control over this, that is a contradiction with reason of more self control for the UK, it hurts my brain.

Oh, and it is not illegal under Eu rules I found out. It is not price fixing (far from that), production limiting etc.
https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/selling-in-eu/competition-between-businesses/competition-rules-eu/index_en.htm

PS, I am not against Brexit, but the reasons why people want to leave is sometimes strange, blaming weird stuff on the Eu , do some even know how the EU works I wonder.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, LeoV said:

You have a point with, why does not Germany exports his Russian gas to Poland, that is in the contract and if htat is illegal or not under Eu rules,

The main issue is Russia/Gazprom not wanting to increase supply to Europe across places like the Ukraine a country it has a undeclared war with. So Germany becomes the conduit by commercial agreement to other users where the reality is all those EU users will probably have to subsidise gas to the non EU Ukraine I assume. Poland I don't think is so captive.

All because of a 3rd World War going on no one wants to talk about. Maybe if some in the UK had a taste of life in eastern Europe they might not feel so agrieved about percieved costs of being a EU member, particularly in winter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sailabout said:

a bit, yes

but trade deficit with the EU or possible surplus with Putin??

a free trade zone with Russia, UK and USA would be quite large and unlike the EU would be trade only without a Brussels micro managing everything thing from human rights to the size of a pint.

I'm an Orthodox Christian of Greek descent.  I like Russians.  One of my nephews is married to a lady whose parents emigrated from Russia to the United States, and one of my cousins in Greece seems about to marry a lady from Russia.  After the fall of the Soviet Union, I had high hopes that Russia would become democratic and form close ties with the West.  Under Gorbachev and Yeltsin, I actually thought Russia was headed in this direction, but years of economic hardship and trouble in the Caucuses led Russia down a path of nationalism and xenophobia that brought Putin to power.  Perhaps a few decades of relative peace and prosperity will allow democracy to take hold in Russia, but that isn't the present situation.  Putin is going to continue to engage in crony capitalism and persecute political opponents within Russia, launch disinformation campaigns against western governments, and support separatist groups in Russia's immediate neighbors.  A close economic relationship with Russia under these conditions is just not going to happen.  Western countries will buy oil and natural gas from Russia when the price is favorable, but that can be rationalized on the basis that Venezuela, Nigeria, and the Arab states also have problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This concern regarding reliance on Russia for natural gas should serve as impetus to move toward renewable energy.

 

what_if_we_create_a_better_world_for_nothing.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, LeoV said:

So one reason to get a Brexit is that the Eu is not working (separate deals of countries as example).
But that is because the Eu is not integrated enough to act like one costumer to Russia.
So to stay in you want more Eu control over this, that is a contradiction with reason of more self control for the UK, it hurts my brain.

Oh, and it is not illegal under Eu rules I found out. It is not price fixing (far from that), production limiting etc.
https://europa.eu/youreurope/business/selling-in-eu/competition-between-businesses/competition-rules-eu/index_en.htm

PS, I am not against Brexit, but the reasons why people want to leave is sometimes strange, blaming weird stuff on the Eu , do some even know how the EU works I wonder.
 

Clearly illegal...but resolved in this years settlement with Gazprom:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-gazprom-eu-competition-idUSKBN16K15J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, captain_crunch said:

This concern regarding reliance on Russia for natural gas should serve as impetus to move toward renewable energy.

That's complicated by the realities of the commercial world. For instance on one hand the US doing everything possible to take away Europes reliance on Russian gas with its LNG export capacity. However on the other hand the same US energy companys have been using their LNG ships to deliver LNG they bought in Russia to Europe, presumably to disguise it's origin for some politically sensitive customer countries. 

Not sure if the renewable energy sector is up to trickery like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

The main issue is Russia/Gazprom not wanting to increase supply to Europe across places like the Ukraine a country it has a undeclared war with. So Germany becomes the conduit by commercial agreement to other users where the reality is all those EU users will probably have to subsidise gas to the non EU Ukraine I assume. Poland I don't think is so captive.

All because of a 3rd World War going on no one wants to talk about. Maybe if some in the UK had a taste of life in eastern Europe they might not feel so agrieved about percieved costs of being a EU member, particularly in winter.

That would require them getting their collective heads out of their collective arses and actually travelling overseas. 

2 weeks in Benidorm etc doesn’t count. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's pretty condescending Mad. We have a large problem across many Western countries with the arrogance of those in power leading to the Trumps, Le Pens, Five Star movement et al.

I'm not sure which way I would have voted in the referendum if I had still been living in the UK. Demonising those who voted to leave as all racist and ignorant is just living in a bubble.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see evidence that racism is a valid characterisation for all leave voters. I've asked every one that I have met to tell me how the EU works, and not a single one has described it correctly, and most don't even try, admitting they don't know or care, so ignorant in this regard does seem to be a valid observation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the EU works? It takes money from the Germans and gives it to French farmers!

The EU Council (Member Heads of State) sets policy,  Commission proposes laws, Council of Europe (Member state ministers) and European parliament debate and approve laws proposed by commission. ECJ enforces the laws.

Of course the rules are subject to a lot of back room political wrangling and the ECJ will do anything to further EU power. Look at what happened to Protocol 30 of the Lisbon treaty.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Expatriated said:

Clearly illegal...but resolved in this years settlement with Gazprom:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-gazprom-eu-competition-idUSKBN16K15J

Will look into that, quick read did not mention the German Russia deal and price difference to Poland what was your base.
Spend one minute more, this is not about German Russian deal, but Gazproms dealing with more counties.
Qoute article;

The provisional deal, which is subject to feedback from some EU states and market players, moves closer to ending one of Brussels’ longest-running antitrust probes that began with raids on offices in 10 countries in 2011 and culminated in charges Gazprom, which supplies a third of the EU’s gas, had abused its dominant position.If the deal comes into force, Russia’s state gas exporter will escape fines of up to 10 percent of its global turnover - an outcome likely to anger Poland and eastern EU countries which have sought a tougher line from Brussels.
Eight member states in the east at the center of the case, all formerly dominated by Moscow, now have until May 4 to object to the European Commission’s view and could seek changes in the deal.

So mixing things up I am afraid.

See the power of Google, in 5 minutes you can find out if something has a solid base or not. If more people did that, it is not a new invention.
That is way I asked for a link, could not find any on my own, did include Germany in search, and that proved empty :)
Was interesting to research, thank you for making me think.

1 hour ago, Expatriated said:

Look at what happened to Protocol 30 of the Lisbon treaty.

Linky ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just was tv talk show who had Dijsselbloem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeroen_Dijsselbloem) at the table.
He mentioned that the EU cohesion was because they stand with the Irish, they lead the discussion now, and do not want a hard border. As do the DUP from NI, which is in cahoot with the Conservatives.

And he sees May's action as a flight forward, he thinks there could be a referendum.
1- do you agree with this deal
 if the majority do not agree with the deal, do you want
2 return to Eu or 3 Hard brexit.



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, LeoV said:

Look at what happened to Protocol 30 of the Lisbon treaty.

So I looked, with you not giving any info more, finding the right info is harder, please elaborate.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmeuleg/979/97908.htm

According to this, the problem was not with the protocol but the UK interpretation of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mad said:

The main issue is Russia/Gazprom not wanting to increase supply to Europe across places like the Ukraine a country it has a undeclared war with. So Germany becomes the conduit by commercial agreement to other users where the reality is all those EU users will probably have to subsidise gas to the non EU Ukraine I assume. Poland I don't think is so captive.

Much more complicated. Ukraine is a mess on its own.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2929323/How-Russia-plays-politics-with-Gazprom.html

Oh, and Russia's biggest problem ? Poverty. They need the income of gas deliveries to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't find the quote from Tony Blair in 2007 about this but he is devious POS. The link above comes from after the ECJ decision but I can only find a poor link at https://www.biicl.org/files/5674_barnard_10-12-10_biicl.pdf and https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/06/08/britains-defiant-judges-fight-back-against-europes-imperial-cour/

The current deal is the worst of all possible worlds. The UK should not have invoked article 50 until exit preparations were well underway - at this point the only options are a train wreck exit that will severe economic damage to the UK but also inflict grievous economic harm on the EU member states OR stay in the EU. I think a second referendum would have a good chance of producing a bigger vote for brexit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Proposal 30; can not find anything other then it was a fight over words, not that EU acted badly. It was a political joust. Not a thing to hang a Brexit on.

Could be that leave vote gets bigger, so many did not vote. Could go the other way, as more older people voted leave, and younger remain. So a few % has gone while a few % young  come in the age bracket to vote.

Be not be surprised if the EU will give the UK more time to sort out the mess, even if it is hard Brexit.

So what is so bad about the deal ? The 500 plus pages was the divorce deal, who pays what, what to do about some stuff, nothing important for the future.
All Eu rules apply for 2 years except free movement of people.
That is in a few extra pages and is full of; we will work this out the next two years. Trade deals, fishing etc etc, the future of the UK.
So the deal is actually workable, no border problems, no medication shortage, no tariffs etc for a while.
The only bad thing I see is the backstop not having an end date or one sided getting out of.

If people has good reasons to get out, fine, but blaming all on "the Eu is bad" is to simplistic. It has bad points, it has good points, as do the UK.
Strong points of EU,internal market free trade, bad points to much division in poor Eastern/Richer West leading to the Polish plumber in the UK or Netherlands, that will be sorted out in a decade. It cost the rich money (me too), stifles innovation (less robots as they do shitty jobs too). EU can be weak in international crises as to many opinions in a 27 member Union.
Strong points UK in EU, free movement of products and finances, bad point of being in the EU, loosing fishing rights, no border control, decisions made in Brussel not in London. oh and it costs money.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_vote_in_favour_of_Brexit

Is this a good source ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was an ECJ case that went against the UK were the court described Protocol 30 as a 'comfort clause' only. There was another case where the ECJ asserted they could block a UK Government minister even presenting a bill to the House of Parliament. There is much else to be suspicious of in the EU - legal immunity for officials in many areas (the Electromagnetic Compatibility Directive which I had some involvement with is an example.) There is problem when the Germans can run huge surpluses for years which is against EU rules while gutting Greece and Italy. The German encouragement for immigration was completely outrageous.

It will be interesting to see how the EU manages the Italian proposed budget and the French budget deficit after Macron's recent back down. I suspect it will be one rule for Italy and no rules for France.

I agree that "the EU is bad" is too simplistic but so is the converse! I do think if there was a reasonable (3 year? 5 year?) end date to the 'Irish backstop' the whole mess could be resolved.

After a quick look the wikipedia site looks reasonable though lacking in references. The Rotten Heart of Europe by Bernard Connolly, though old, is still a worthwhile read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Qoute; The German encouragement for immigration was completely outrageous. Many in the EU agree with that, probably even a majority.

Connolly was good in  the financial details, his view of cultural classes was over the top, seen a documentary about him. Pitting his ideas against the German ideas.

His main quip is that the EU is an illegal, undemocratic, corporative controlled state, but is the UK not one corporative controlled state too ?
But in modern day EU the UK is the one not wanting to restrict the financial institutes.

http://pdl-iphone-cnbc-com.akamaized.net/VCPS/Y2013/M05D16/3000161188/5ED3-SOTS-bernardconnolly0516_L.mp4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But enough about the EU, back to the UK, what is so great of the UK that is lost due to being in the EU ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Expatriated said:

How the EU works? It takes money from the Germans and gives it to French farmers!

This kind of simplistic statement creates an impression that the data does not support. France is a net contributor to the EU purse. The common agricultural policy is exactly that - common to all. The Germans don't give money to French farmers any more than they give money to the Spanish, British, or German farmers. Of course countries that don't produce much food (Germany, UK) have less farmers to receive subsidies, so the total received is less, but that corresponds to the purpose of the CAP, to ensure that the food produced is to a high standard throughout the EU. We all benefit from this.

The issue I have with statements like this is that they are too easily remembered, and believed, and create a strong impression that goes beyond the actual words, even though it is false on every level. The money paid to French farmers is deducted from the French contribution, so no money is taken from the Germans to give to French farmers, but this statement, if made by a Brit, also gives the impression that this is all the EU does, and by inference it doesn't do anything for us, again completely false but this is the impression that people take away from such statements.

This kind of sound bite favoured by the British press and politicians for the last 40 years is why we are in this situation now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is a good question and almost impossible to answer what could have been! The relationship with the commonwealth was badly damaged, the fishing industry almost destroyed, a lot of cash on a one-way street, lots & lots of rules...there have been many benefits to membership.

Since you are from the Netherlands what is your opinion of the rejected in a Dutch referendum EU constitution coming back hardly modified as the Lisbon treaty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Expatriated said:

I think a second referendum would have a good chance of producing a bigger vote for brexit.

All polling suggests the opposite with majority wanting a second referendum and the vote outcome would be to stay. If it wasn't for this polling progress may be different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Expatriated said:

There was another case where the ECJ asserted they could block a UK Government minister even presenting a bill to the House of Parliament.

Could you give a link to this. I've done a search and can't find it in the EU site, but I might not be searching with suitable terms.

I can't recall an instance where a UK minister was prevented from presenting a bill to parliament, but if you could give the subject I might be able to find something.

Thanks.

Edit. It is worth noting that the ECJ has ruled against most countries at some point, they aren't picking on the UK. When they find against the French, it is presented as a personal attack in the French media, much as it is in the UK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If one were pie charting world stature (using some composite of economy, military, cultural influence, population, coolness etc.) it would have big slices for USA, Russia, and China. Let's say that's 67% of the pie. Europe could also be a notable slice (20% ?) if they manage to sing from the same page in the hymnal. The rest of the planet makes up the various slices of the remainder and fall under the sphere of protection/influence (eagerly or not) of one of the big 3. If Europe manages to disaggregate as a somewhat unified commercial/political entity, they all get to be additional little slices, tails wagged by the big dogs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hump101 said:

Could you give a link to this. I've done a search and can't find it in the EU site, but I might not be searching with suitable terms.

I can't recall an instance where a UK minister was prevented from presenting a bill to parliament, but if you could give the subject I might be able to find something.

Thanks.

Edit. It is worth noting that the ECJ has ruled against most countries at some point, they aren't picking on the UK. When they find against the French, it is presented as a personal attack in the French media, much as it is in the UK.

I don't have a time to find a link at the moment but i seem to remember it was related to environmental impact studies for the HS2 rail line.

I'll ask you the same question I asked LeoV:

Since you are from the France what is your opinion of the rejected in a French referendum EU constitution coming back hardly modified as the Lisbon treaty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One aspect I have found interesting whilst living in France is how different the laws are here compared to the UK, despite the impression that we are ruled by the EU and the ECJ. Every aspect of my life here has dissimilar laws, from car registration, insurance, gun laws, hunting permits, power supply, yacht registration, building standards, animal husbandry and administration, business administration. In fact, I can't think of a law that is the same in both countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Expatriated said:

Since you are from the France what is your opinion of the rejected in a French referendum EU constitution coming back hardly modified as the Lisbon treaty?

I think that is exactly what happens when a group get together and try to make common standards. Of course each individual party won't agree with the compromise, as by definition the compromise won't perfectly match their requirements, but as a treaty to bind all parties, it has to take a middle ground.

Any treaty that met all countries expectations would be worthless, because it would effectively be letting everyone do whatever they want, as if no treaty was in place.

Edit: a sailing analogy: if you were trying to develop a common RRS, and one party says "give way to starboard" and another says "give way to port", so you say, "OK, give way to any direction", then the RRS may please all parties, but they would be useless. If you choose the "give way to starboard" crowd, then the "give way to port" group are going to scream and shout, but to be effective the RRS has to choose one or the other. So it is with international treaties, only with orders of magnitude more complexity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

All polling suggests the opposite with majority wanting a second referendum and the vote outcome would be to stay. If it wasn't for this polling progress may be different.

And so it was last time. And so it was with Trump/Clinton. Just saying, and agreeing with much of what Expatriated has said. In England, hearing and seeing it, spending time in Europe, listening and talking, but professing no knowledge and wisdom beyond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Q said:

Actually weights and measures are defined by an international treaty which is metric, and controlled by scientists from all over the world via the International Bureau of Weights and Measures. Even the  strange American Measures are now controlled by comparison to standard metric measures. The Yanks having joined the metrification treaty originally for the Metre back in 1875, long before the UK

the UK negotiated a deal to allow the pint to be a current and future measure

the EU is full of deals for example

You dont need any cocoa in Chocolate to sell it as chocolate in the EU, can be 100% fat, colouring and flavouring.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LeoV said:

Strong points UK in EU, free movement of products and finances, bad point of being in the EU, loosing fishing rights, no border control, decisions made in Brussel not in London. oh and it costs money.

That is a good example why people are confused. What you say there is the exact  opposite to what the pro Brexits like Boris and Rees Mogg are preaching.  Their mantra is free trade post-Brexit with all sorts of deals to be done with nations outside of the EU away from EU regulations.

In formulating this thought that this will boost Britain as a market they have failed to to grasp that Britain is no longer viewed as a market or asked the question a market for what? Those best equipped to answer that question is counties that originaly relied upon the UK pre it joining the EU and who had to adjust to that.

That adjustment has not been uniform but many have gone down the path of developing free trade agreements including those with the EU. You would think then Brexit with the UK free to negotiate its own bilateral trade agreements with those countries would be good for the UK? But what of agreements those countries already have? Do they tear them up and jump on a plane to Heathrow? What then will be the British farmers reaction to cheaper beef, lamb and dairy penetrating the British market when they no longer receive the generous agricultural subsidies that are associated with EU membership? 

If the UK are leaving the EU single market then they will have to replace that with a trade agreement with the EU. How is that going to work out sitting in the same line as non EU countries doing exactly the same thing. It is assumed the UK would inherit the EU’s bound tariffs. However what is the reaction to trading partners when that same tarriff applies yet with no benefit of free circulation within the EU?

Trade deals are long and complex processes noting the UK is prevented from negotiating trade deals with third party countries until Brexit takes effect.

So is the UK really equipped to join the free trade world? I suspect there are many that suggest it is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the many screw up with the BREXIT negotiations is that the UK should have started negotiating trade deals immediately and if the EU complained told them to take a hike. Clearly the deals could not come into effect unless and until BREXIT but the whole approach was dumb beyond belief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hump101 said:

I think that is exactly what happens when a group get together and try to make common standards. Of course each individual party won't agree with the compromise, as by definition the compromise won't perfectly match their requirements, but as a treaty to bind all parties, it has to take a middle ground.

Any treaty that met all countries expectations would be worthless, because it would effectively be letting everyone do whatever they want, as if no treaty was in place.

Edit: a sailing analogy: if you were trying to develop a common RRS, and one party says "give way to starboard" and another says "give way to port", so you say, "OK, give way to any direction", then the RRS may please all parties, but they would be useless. If you choose the "give way to starboard" crowd, then the "give way to port" group are going to scream and shout, but to be effective the RRS has to choose one or the other. So it is with international treaties, only with orders of magnitude more complexity.

When given a vote the French people voted NO and the EU brought in constitution as a treaty and the french didn't get a vote; does Non mean Qui?

Didn't the Irish have to vote twice to get the richt result on the Lisbon treaty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Sailabout said:

tell me, how do you see wealth in Sicily?

would that be all the global business that started there?

other than plum tomatoes what do they have?

Does it look like Singapore these days?

There is a lot of hidden money owned by the mob.  They operate in the shadows and through bizarre and obscure companies that you probably never heard of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites