Meat Wad

Brexit, WTF

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, captain_crunch said:

I think May is a realist.  I think she fully believes Brexit is a bad idea.  I think she believes she needs to make a sincere effort to implement Brexit in order to demonstrate to the voting public all the reasons Brexit is a bad idea.  I think she will withdraw the Article 50 declaration at the last moment and either cancel Brexit unilaterally or call for a public vote on the matter with fairly strong assurance that Remain will prevail.  Of course, I could be wrong.

 

3 hours ago, marisca said:

I always reckoned May was playing the Brexiteers from the start with the aim of staying in the EU. Think about it .... she appoints Boris as Foreign Secretary to make him look an even bigger idiot than before, appoints the lazy work-shy Davis as Brexit secretary, when he throws his teddy out the pram she appoints Raab C. Brexit (the colonials may not get that reference) to replace him, back stabber Gove is sidelined in the Min of Ag & Fish and she then proceeds to screw up any chance of a deal by continually kicking the insoluble can of the Irish border down the road until it has finally scuppered the whole deal. Finally she orchestrates a vote of no-confidence so that she can't be challenged for another 12 months during which the whole mess can be scrapped, probably by another plebiscite.

 

I would have agreed with both these posts up to a few months ago when I visited GB. From the beginning I thought that eventually May would back out. The Brits though, at least the ones I talked to, all well-educated folks, are absolutely certain that they are doomed. I still hope you are right, but I strongly doubt it.

Share this post


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

The problem for any future referendum will be what will be the question?

if it's    in or out, the brexiteers will protest we've already had that

if it's,   Hard soft or no brexit, the Hard and No Brexiteers will protest... and with the triple question do you have a transferable vote, because if not no one will get more that 50%

 

Meanwhile, the schedule for Parliament till Christmas has published.... it does not include the vote May cancelled...

 

 

Hard or soft is not only the UK their choise. 

Share this post


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

Hard or soft is not only the UK their choise. 

I don't see a lot of backers for the easy-over option, with or without toast.

Share this post


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

"Former British foreign secretary Boris Johnson on Saturday called for the government to appoint a minister to prepare for a “no-deal” British exit from the European Union in order to increase London’s leverage in talks with Brussels."

 

The continuing delusion that the EU would be hurt by no-deal anything like as much the UK would. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, dogwatch said:

The continuing delusion that the EU would be hurt by no-deal anything like as much the UK would. 

The level of denial and delusion is astounding. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Member states of the EU already calculated the cost of a hard Brexit, numbers for the coming years estimated, budget for it is made free. In the short run it will cost a lot, in the future if everything is settled, it will not cost much, or maybe even break even. Financial institutes, car making, medicines/chemical industry, air plane construction can be moved/ easily started up in the EU. Whisky we can get from Ireland. The rest of which the UK is good at was import/export anyway, nothing really UK about it, like gold, titanium mining companies. The only exports we will miss if the UK should leave the EU common market are the oil, jet engines and Sotheby's. The rest is replaceable, movable or easy to tariff the hell out.

It is so much easier for 27 countries to divide the pain of one country leaving then for one country to compete with a bloc of 27. Some of which are looking with vulture eyes to some industries, like the car making. They see profit in a Brexit for their country.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Sorry but I can't agree. There is a refendum that the voters reject and then the same agreement is accepted without a further referendum? This is not good governance. Why di9d France bother having the first referendum?

France had the referendum to determine the opinion of its people, and to give itself more leverage in the negotiations, but the referendum is not binding on the government, who must then decide the best course for the country, already knowing in detail the compromises involved in arriving at the original treaty. What are you suggesting then as an alternative? The agreement be changed to reflect the views of all the elements in all the countries? It won't be much of an agreement in such a case.

This issue comes down to the crux of how the EU works. Your description in an earlier post is pretty much how the EU describes itself, simplistically, but doesn't actually reflect reality. The EU council of domestic governments set policy, but laws are not created by the EU commissioners. In practice, the identification of a need for law creation or change comes from many different sources, individual governments, groups of governments, external incidents (e.g. foot and mouth outbreaks), or any concerned citizen if they choose. MEP's can raise issues via their own committees, for example. Once a need is identified, then the various domestic government negotiators, each with their own governments shopping lists, start pounding out the details in committees and other forums, all administered by the commissioners. Once legislation is agreed, the commissioners present it to parliament, and the MEP's get to debate it in the full parliament and also in their own committees.

One common criticism is that the MEP's have limited abilities to amend proposed legislation, leading to the accusation that the un-elected commissioners are dictating to parliament, but this is not the case. The domestic governments representatives have created the laws, and they are the ones dictating to the EU parliament. This is a deliberate policy because the domestic governments sought to limit the EU parliaments powers relative to their own, and also (and this relates to my point above) because if the MEP's, with their widely varied shopping lists, attempted to rewrite each legislation they would never complete anything. It takes professional negotiators to work at this level, and MEP's are not, by and large, professional negotiators. They are our elected representatives, "ordinary" people, to provide oversight to ensure that legislation is appropriate and effective. It can be thought of as a similar function to the UK House of Lords, except that we get to elect them.

Consequently, it can be argued that the EU is more democratic, not less, than the domestic governments (certainly in the case of the UK), but by necessity the resulting legislation will not be ideal for any one country, any more than domestic legislation would be ideal for any one county or department. It can't be any other way.

Edit: And the EU is certainly a lot more transparent in its dealings than any domestic government.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BBC question time, David Davies mentions UK is world leader in artificial intelligence, self driving cars and gen modification. So they will prosper after brexit and make the UK rich.
1- artificial intellligence
basicly wrong, and needs a lot if investment to make it true and immigrants to make it happen,
https://www.raconteur.net/technology/uk-ai-strategy

2- self driving cars
wrong again, they hope to get there
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-03/brexit-britain-wants-to-become-a-mecca-for-driverless-vehicles

3- Gen modification
can not find anything proving that
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jun/20/owen-paterson-uk-global-leaders-gm-crops

It is amazing how he is lying....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Green party comment in BBC qt rings a bell, about 2d referendum, measure twice cut once in important decisions..

Share this post


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

The level of denial and delusion is astounding. 

And why you have to give Rees Mogg one thing, he is an excellent communicator and debater. That is amplified when he is one of those who don't abide by their party/their leaders line.

BBC reporters (not commentators) are usually pretty good at maintaining a balanced line but I think last night this lass thought to herself, fuck this wanker.

 

Share this post


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

2- self driving cars
wrong again, they hope to get there

They must think everyone else also has RH drive cars.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, captain_crunch said:

I think she will withdraw the Article 50 declaration at the last moment and either cancel Brexit unilaterally or call for a public vote on the matter with fairly strong assurance that Remain will prevail.  Of course, I could be wrong.

And this graph shows you are more right than wrong.

It shows that the "Brexit yes" vote was not driven by opinions of financial, common market and other complex relationships with Europe at all, but driven by divisive opinions about nationalism, border control and immigration.

The public knew very little or even cared about the EU prior to 2016. Probably why the word EU was Googled so much at the time of the referendum being called.

Once it had been presented as a referendum on immigration policy, the electorate began to care, but only in that one-dimensional fashion. So in other words large numbers of people did not actually understand what they were voting for at all.

If the country had been presented with Brexit in the right terms and not as a proxy for immigration, the country probably would never have agreed to it. By the way this graph doesn't indicate people have stopped caring about immigration, they've simply changed how they categorise it and it now sits behind Brexit as a priority.

No wonder the Brexiteers like Boris and Rees Mogg are so mortally afraid of a People Vote and willing to do a No Deal Brexit. Similiarly the Labour Party won't commit to a People's Vote and would prefer a early General Election.

The Tories and Irish MP's with half a brain realise that for every day that goes by where people become better educated, the anti Brexit numbers rise. Once they rise with sufficient margin to lessen the prospects of having a divided country they can then either instigate the People Vote or maybe even just scrap it and walk away.

So it is a Poker game now where May won the first hand on Wednesday night and Boris and Corbyn need more chips. She also appears to be pretty good at not blinking.

https___d1e00ek4ebabms.cloudfront.net_production_971de8b9-67f5-43fa-a44c-570977847b5f_FINAL.png

Share this post


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

And this graph shows you are more right than wrong.

It shows that the "Brexit yes" vote was not driven by opinions of financial, common market and other complex relationships with Europe at all, but driven by divisive opinions about nationalism, border control and immigration.

The public knew very little or even cared about the EU prior to 2016. Probably why the word EU was Googled so much at the time of the referendum being called.

Once it had been presented as a referendum on immigration policy, the electorate began to care, but only in that one-dimensional fashion. So in other words large numbers of people did not actually understand what they were voting for at all.

If the country had been presented with Brexit in the right terms and not as a proxy for immigration, the country probably would never have agreed to it. By the way this graph doesn't indicate people have stopped caring about immigration, they've simply changed how they categorise it and it now sits behind Brexit as a priority.

No wonder the Brexiteers like Boris and Rees Mogg are so mortally afraid of a People Vote and willing to do a No Deal Brexit. Similiarly the Labour Party won't commit to a People's Vote and would prefer a early General Election.

The Tories and Irish MP's with half a brain realise that for every day that goes by where people become better educated, the anti Brexit numbers rise. Once they rise with sufficient margin to lessen the prospects of having a divided country they can then either instigate the People Vote or maybe even just scrap it and walk away.

So it is a Poker game now where May won the first hand on Wednesday night and Boris and Corbyn need more chips. She also appears to be pretty good at not blinking.

https___d1e00ek4ebabms.cloudfront.net_production_971de8b9-67f5-43fa-a44c-570977847b5f_FINAL.png

I believe concern regarding Muslim immigrants was a large part of the reason for the election of Donald Trump, which was the US version of the Brexit vote. Obama made a tactical blunder by promising that the US would accept a significant number of Syrian refugees, and Hillary Clinton made a blunder by not distancing herself from the policy. This isn't to say that accepting Syrian refugees wasn't the morally right thing to do, but the election occurred at a time that ISIS, terrorist attacks, and the migrant crisis in southern Europe were in the news headlines every day. While it is true that far more Americans are killed by angry white men with guns than by Muslim terrorists, this is an awkward argument for justifying refugee policy.

Share this post


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

I believe concern regarding Muslim immigrants was a large part of the reason for the election of Donald Trump, which was the US version of the Brexit vote. 

And if May prevails it might signify a watershed for the influence of far right wing politicians worldwide when people realise it isn't the immigrant on the factory floor they should be fearfull of, but shit government policy where there is no factory floor.

Share this post


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

Member states of the EU already calculated the cost of a hard Brexit, numbers for the coming years estimated, budget for it is made free. In the short run it will cost a lot, in the future if everything is settled, it will not cost much, or maybe even break even. Financial institutes, car making, medicines/chemical industry, air plane construction can be moved/ easily started up in the EU. Whisky we can get from Ireland. The rest of which the UK is good at was import/export anyway, nothing really UK about it, like gold, titanium mining companies. The only exports we will miss if the UK should leave the EU common market are the oil, jet engines and Sotheby's. The rest is replaceable, movable or easy to tariff the hell out.

It is so much easier for 27 countries to divide the pain of one country leaving then for one country to compete with a bloc of 27. Some of which are looking with vulture eyes to some industries, like the car making. They see profit in a Brexit for their country.

you make it sound like nobody from outside the EU can trade with it

Trump was talking about adding tariffs to EU cars, Junkers was in the USA the next day doing a deal..

UK runs a trade deficit on hard goods, there will be plenty of EU manufacturers making sure they dont lose that market

More then one German politician and industrialist have mentioned its an important market

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re the immigration issue, the problem stems from the UK being the largest English speaking country in the EU, what happens is each EU country may well agree to settle x number of refugees  or whatever you call them, who then migrate to the UK as they usually speak English and no rules/identity card etc in the UK so they know they can just walk in. Speaking English they will have a better chance at getting a job. Nothing the UK can do about it and nobody likes to keep the numbers but when they arrive in the UK, the UK is then obligated to house cloth and feed them it appears.

Then all the relatives can fly in a live with them for free medical care. I dont know how the rest of the EU deals with this?

Theres more, the UK has a deal where they do medical care for all Mariners, so ships load half dead and dying crew on board just to get to UK ports, call ambulance and go to hospital yet no bond from the ship required, so they are just left in the UK I assume?

I had clients kids that used to say to me, grandad flying over in a few weeks, oh why, been on NHS waiting list for 2 years, now getting his new hip.
Heard that far too many times.

Does the UK even have passport exit checks yet??

Share this post


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

BBC question time, David Davies mentions UK is world leader in artificial intelligence,


It is amazing how he is lying....

He may have a point.....there doesnt seem much genuine intelligence in the House of Commons.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

BBC question time, David Davies mentions UK is world leader in artificial intelligence, 

This Brexit voter should put his hand up to be a donor...very scary.

 

Share this post


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

you make it sound like nobody from outside the EU can trade with it

You can trade with each other, it will, but at a cost. Tariffs hurts. So UK is not getting better of it, nor the EU. That is the premise Brexit is partly build on, we will get rich, EU needs us. It is the same if as Mass splits from the US and says, we will do well because we will trade with the world, we do not need the US as much as the US needs us.

 

5 hours ago, Sailabout said:

I dont know how the rest of the EU deals with this?

Differently, because it is not an EU law, but an UN one, the EU tries to streamline it so every country takes a part of them, does not work well at the moment It goes from, no immigrants form outside the EU (Hungary) to immigrants welcome (Germany).

Share this post


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

Re the immigration issue, the problem stems from the UK being the largest English speaking country in the EU, what happens is each EU country may well agree to settle x number of refugees  or whatever you call them, who then migrate to the UK as they usually speak English and no rules/identity card etc in the UK so they know they can just walk in. Speaking English they will have a better chance at getting a job. Nothing the UK can do about it and nobody likes to keep the numbers but when they arrive in the UK, the UK is then obligated to house cloth and feed them it appears.

Then all the relatives can fly in a live with them for free medical care. I dont know how the rest of the EU deals with this?

Theres more, the UK has a deal where they do medical care for all Mariners, so ships load half dead and dying crew on board just to get to UK ports, call ambulance and go to hospital yet no bond from the ship required, so they are just left in the UK I assume?

I had clients kids that used to say to me, grandad flying over in a few weeks, oh why, been on NHS waiting list for 2 years, now getting his new hip.
Heard that far too many times.

Does the UK even have passport exit checks yet??

None of these things have anything to do with membership of the EU. As you rightly point out there are differences between EU states i.e. the EU isn't stopping the UK doing the same.

Share this post


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

And this graph shows you are more right than wrong.

It shows that the "Brexit yes" vote was not driven by opinions of financial, common market and other complex relationships with Europe at all, but driven by divisive opinions about nationalism, border control and immigration.

The public knew very little or even cared about the EU prior to 2016. Probably why the word EU was Googled so much at the time of the referendum being called.

Once it had been presented as a referendum on immigration policy, the electorate began to care, but only in that one-dimensional fashion. So in other words large numbers of people did not actually understand what they were voting for at all.

If the country had been presented with Brexit in the right terms and not as a proxy for immigration, the country probably would never have agreed to it. By the way this graph doesn't indicate people have stopped caring about immigration, they've simply changed how they categorise it and it now sits behind Brexit as a priority.

No wonder the Brexiteers like Boris and Rees Mogg are so mortally afraid of a People Vote and willing to do a No Deal Brexit. Similiarly the Labour Party won't commit to a People's Vote and would prefer a early General Election.

The Tories and Irish MP's with half a brain realise that for every day that goes by where people become better educated, the anti Brexit numbers rise. Once they rise with sufficient margin to lessen the prospects of having a divided country they can then either instigate the People Vote or maybe even just scrap it and walk away.

So it is a Poker game now where May won the first hand on Wednesday night and Boris and Corbyn need more chips. She also appears to be pretty good at not blinking.

https___d1e00ek4ebabms.cloudfront.net_production_971de8b9-67f5-43fa-a44c-570977847b5f_FINAL.png

Would say that she has been flagging pretty clearly that its her deal or she will retract Article 50.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, rgeek said:

None of these things have anything to do with membership of the EU. As you rightly point out there are differences between EU states i.e. the EU isn't stopping the UK doing the same.

what I am saying is the UK dont have the right to stop the people coming from other EU countries who, due to slack internal controls are a huge cost to the UK and one of the reasons the punters voted to leave. France calls it the honey pot, hence the queue at the channel tunnel.

Brits are ferociously independent and free not having lived under dictators like the rest of the EU in the last 100 years.

Free movement is all to do with the EU

Perhaps the gestapo should run the UK for a while...papers please

Share this post


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

what I am saying is the UK dont have the right to stop the people coming from other EU countries who, due to slack internal controls are a huge cost to the UK and one of the reasons the punters voted to leave. France calls it the honey pot, hence the queue at the channel tunnel.

Brits are ferociously independent and free not having lived under dictators like the rest of the EU in the last 100 years.

Free movement is all to do with the EU

Perhaps the gestapo should run the UK for a while...papers please

But the UK does have the right to refuse welfare and health care to these people, but the UK has opted not to (rightly, in my opinion). The EU cannot be blamed for this.

As we are now seeing, free movement is not all to do with the EU. The level of immigration continues to rise, even though EU migration is negative. Most of this migration is people who have the right to freely move to the UK through other agreements, family connections, marriages, study, etc., not due to fresh applications. Non-EU migration to the UK has always been higher than EU migration - see here.

Share this post


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

But the UK does have the right to refuse welfare and health care to these people, but the UK has opted not to (rightly, in my opinion). The EU cannot be blamed for this.

As we are now seeing, free movement is not all to do with the EU. The level of immigration continues to rise, even though EU migration is negative. Most of this migration is people who have the right to freely move to the UK through other agreements, family connections, marriages, study, etc., not due to fresh applications. Non-EU migration to the UK has always been higher than EU migration - see here.

The UK does not have the right to treat EU (and EEA) immigrants differently to UK citizens; this is the core of Free Movement of People. Of course when I lived in France the bureaucracy made getting a Carte de Sejour (work permit) , to which I had the legal right, painful. The UK is not used to having police demanding identity papers which would happen regularly in Paris to non-whites. Seeing Macron crowing about post BREXIT fishing rights did not help Theresa May sell her deal.

Other reasons for the the EU being unpopular are the misuse of the EU arrest warrant, the increasing over reach of the ECJ, EU army and EU protectionism. The Euro is a currency heading for a very painful denouement with the out of control budget problems of Italy. The French budget deficit isn't looking too good either and with the ECB ending QE next year will be interesting. 

As I mentioned earlier I was involved with the Electromagnetic Compatibility directive which gives governments a legal immunity while imposing vague and impossible rules on business that are never enforced. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If immigration was the problem that Brits were concerned about then the UK doesnt need to leave the EU.

If the choice was Hard Brexit or granting the UK a special border status, then I think both sides could hash out a special border status, in the same way that the UK has a different currency status. It could grant free movement to the 95% of Europeans who have been resident for >15 years and require visas for recent residents.  

Share this post


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

The UK does not have the right to treat EU (and EEA) immigrants differently to UK citizens; this is the core of Free Movement of People.

So wrong, the core of free movement of people are for legal EU citizens, not illegal trespassers. Otherwise we can send any illegal that wants to the UK to the UK, now they get stopped. Or is that all a lie ?
 

21 minutes ago, Expatriated said:

Other reasons for the the EU being unpopular are the misuse of the EU arrest warrant, the increasing over reach of the ECJ, EU army and EU protectionism. The Euro is a currency heading for a very painful denouement with the out of control budget problems of Italy. The French budget deficit isn't looking too good either and with the ECB ending QE next year will be interesting. 


So you just do not trust the way EU is going, good, that is legit. And willing to pay the price, if that is happening.
No need to make things up.

Ps Italy already back in the benches.

Share this post


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

This Brexit voter should put his hand up to be a donor...very scary

If you google LBC James O'Brien he's got some classics.  This is only one but there are many, many more along the same vein.  Very scary indeed.

Share this post


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

what I am saying is the UK dont have the right to stop the people coming from other EU countries who, due to slack internal controls are a huge cost to the UK and one of the reasons the punters voted to leave. France calls it the honey pot, hence the queue at the channel tunnel.

Brits are ferociously independent and free not having lived under dictators like the rest of the EU in the last 100 years.

Free movement is all to do with the EU

Perhaps the gestapo should run the UK for a while...papers please

Yes it does. The UK was one of the few countries that didn't put a limit on east European immigration with the last expansion... because they wanted the workers!

The tunnel is bewteen 2 EU countries. The Calais camp (populated mostly by none EU migrants) has nothing to do with EU level limitations.

Share this post


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

 

Other reasons for the the EU being unpopular are the misuse of the EU arrest warrant, the increasing over reach of the ECJ, EU army and EU protectionism. The Euro is a currency heading for a very painful denouement with the out of control budget problems of Italy. The French budget deficit isn't looking too good either and with the ECB ending QE next year will be interesting. 

1

 

The UK uses the pound, not the Euro. The ECJ is not required for EU membership. It's required for free trade with the EU (which Bozza and Davis both said was a priority and easily achievable as part of Brexit).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Laser1 said:

If you google LBC James O'Brien he's got some classics.  This is only one but there are many, many more along the same vein.  Very scary indeed.

I watch BBC question time for that, want to hear the politicians speak. And boy, some in the public do deliver. Last night statement of public member, our soldiers died for democracy so if we have a second referendum they would have died in vein. Really only a slight huff from the public, incredible.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they that shameful??!?!?

Legacy of the those who sacrificed during the war? The war generation came out of the war and voted in a progressive labour government that created the welfare state, NHS, expanded public education system etc. etc. If they died in vain because, as the war generation passes away, the Tories have rolled back every single service that generation put in place.

Did anyone remind him that that generation voted to enter the EU in the first place?

Share this post


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

 

The UK uses the pound, not the Euro. The ECJ is not required for EU membership. It's required for free trade with the EU (which Bozza and Davis both said was a priority and easily achievable as part of Brexit).

You are wrong about the ECJ - the Canadian trade deal is not subject to the ECJ. The EEA has the EFTA court (https://www.ft.com/content/268fa1a2-ca2f-11e7-ab18-7a9fb7d6163e) and not the ECJ. The ECJ applies far beyond trade deals. Accepting the ECJ is absolutely required for EU membership.

The Euro is the EU's biggest problem. An economic slow down will be a far bigger problem than BREXIT.

Share this post


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

Are they that shameful??!?!?

Legacy of the those who sacrificed during the war? The war generation came out of the war and voted in a progressive labour government that created the welfare state, NHS, expanded public education system etc. etc. If they died in vain because, as the war generation passes away, the Tories have rolled back every single service that generation put in place.

Did anyone remind him that that generation voted to enter the EU in the first place?

Agree.

Share this post


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

The UK does not have the right to treat EU (and EEA) immigrants differently to UK citizens; this is the core of Free Movement of People.

This is not correct. Any EU country has the right to restrict access to welfare, etc., for arrivals from other EU countries. I had thought that the UK was amongst the very few EU countries not to exercise this right, but from here it appears the Cameron government did introduce some restrictions in 2010 - 2013.

Share this post


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

Did anyone remind him that that generation voted to enter the EU in the first place?

And the same generation that first restricted immigration from Commonwealth countries, (many whose forebears were English) finally restricting even temp working visas while giving EU member citizens free passage. Some of these people are morons.

Share this post


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

The Euro is the EU's biggest problem. An economic slow down will be a far bigger problem than BREXIT. 

Yep, the Brexit show is just a sideshow. That is how important the Brexit is for the Eu :).

 

42 minutes ago, rgeek said:

Are they that shameful??!?!?

watch

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EU rules, if after 3 months EU workers in another EU country does not have a job or can not provide for itself they can send back, Belgium does.
  European Parliament and Council Directive 2004/38/EC read this pdf

Snips;
Persons exercising their right of residence should not, however, become an unreasonable
burden on the social assistance system of the host Member State during an initial period of
residence. Therefore, the right of residence for Union citizens and their family members for
periods in excess of three months should be subject to conditions.

 

However, it should be left to the host Member State to decide whether it will grant social
assistance during the first three months of residence, or for a longer period in the case of
job-seekers, to Union citizens other than those who are workers or self-employed persons or
who retain that status or their family members, or maintenance assistance for studies,
including vocational training, prior to acquisition of the right of permanent residence, to these
same persons.

etc etc, blame your politicians, not the EU

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

If you read what the link you posted the restriction is for the first 3 months only.  This gives some old background https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-35101437.

What I posted was and is correct.

Was going to post this link, but Leo has also covered it. Any EU country has the right to treat EU migrants differently from their own citizens. Free movement does not mean equal rights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This does not apply at all to 'in work' benefits or to people with reasonable expectations of finding work. Yes the UK could (and should have) changed the benefit system in many ways.An EU citizen can take a low paid job in the UK leaving their family in their home country and collect benefits higher than the average earning in the 'home' country; the EU refused to allow the UK to change this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed that the British benefit system could be changed in many ways, but to do so to specifically target a group that is a net contributor to the system wouldn't be my first move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As inflation and unemployment usually having an inverse relationship, it might be worth noting that on average, those members who have retained their own currency have faired better w unemployment statistics than those saddled w the euro... Greece, Spain, Italy and France being the current front runners. Some of the youth unemployment stats are staggering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UK unemployment stats look great at the moment as they count everyone with a zero hours contract as employed, even though the government is paying in-work benefits to these people to cover the shortfall between their salaries and the cost of living. I don't know how prevalent this is in other countries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear! ........ sparks flying in Brussels.  Looks like the EU boys are loosing their patience with Nebulous Theresa :lol:

Share this post


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

Re the immigration issue, the problem stems from the UK being the largest English speaking country in the EU, what happens is each EU country may well agree to settle x number of refugees  or whatever you call them, who then migrate to the UK as they usually speak English and no rules/identity card etc in the UK so they know they can just walk in. Speaking English they will have a better chance at getting a job. Nothing the UK can do about it and nobody likes to keep the numbers but when they arrive in the UK, the UK is then obligated to house cloth and feed them it appears.

Then all the relatives can fly in a live with them for free medical care. I dont know how the rest of the EU deals with this?

Theres more, the UK has a deal where they do medical care for all Mariners, so ships load half dead and dying crew on board just to get to UK ports, call ambulance and go to hospital yet no bond from the ship required, so they are just left in the UK I assume?

I had clients kids that used to say to me, grandad flying over in a few weeks, oh why, been on NHS waiting list for 2 years, now getting his new hip.
Heard that far too many times.

Does the UK even have passport exit checks yet??

Where the fuck did you hear that about ships turning up? 

Share this post


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

This does not apply at all to 'in work' benefits or to people with reasonable expectations of finding work.

Because they pay for that, so now it is about the balance, do they take more then they pay ? Could be, lets fact check again, though facts are lousy.
https://eu-rope.ideasoneurope.eu/2017/10/30/eu-migrants-give-take/

Nope, they pay more then they take.

We had the same discussion here when some Polish people did make fraudulent claims, many people thought they only took, but overall they paid more into it.
Reason the fraud worked, government decision to streamline the service, so workload for the civil worker is to great to check all. Still hate fraudsters though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that blog is very objective. I agree more is raised in taxes paid my immigrants than benefits they receive and have never said otherwise.  It is really dumb that UK benefits are paid to families were the family is not resident in the UK. 

I have been a foreign resident/immigrant in France, Switzerland, Netherlands and the USA and am very certain that I have paid a lot more in taxes than I will ever receive in benefits!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's an interesting summation to think about. I've been an immigrant in the UAE, Tunisia, and France, and if I count the cost of educating my children, subsidised sports, free subsistence in national industries, etc., I'm not sure that I have covered my costs with the taxes I've paid. I certainly haven't covered my education costs in the UK with my personal taxes. I guess that is why most of these countries have to keep borrowing, because hardly anyone covers their direct costs, which is why we shouldn't be picking on the one group that actually does - young, already educated workers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Where the fuck did you hear that about ships turning up? 

Doctor friend of mine working in Guys Hospital, said constant stream of ambulances from Portsmouth, most had long term issues not accidents on board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lots of expensive stats the UK doesnt like to publish.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2291020/more-than-130-polish-criminals-jailed-in-the-uk-should-have-been-deported-in-past-four-years-bungling-officials-admit/

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/mar/08/uk-prison-population-is-biggest-in-western-europe

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/659620/Britain-prison-huge-rise-EU-convicts-150million-taxpayer

poor peoples human rights are offended so the brits pay the bill

UK full of terrorist as well they cant deport, another reason the Brits want out of the stupid EU Court of human rights

Share this post


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

lots of expensive stats the UK doesnt like to publish.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2291020/more-than-130-polish-criminals-jailed-in-the-uk-should-have-been-deported-in-past-four-years-bungling-officials-admit/

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/mar/08/uk-prison-population-is-biggest-in-western-europe

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/659620/Britain-prison-huge-rise-EU-convicts-150million-taxpayer

poor peoples human rights are offended so the brits pay the bill

UK full of terrorist as well they cant deport, another reason the Brits want out of the stupid EU Court of human rights

I'm smelling a UKIPPER.

 

Share this post


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

I have been a foreign resident/immigrant in France, Switzerland, Netherlands and the USA and am very certain that I have paid a lot more in taxes than I will ever receive in benefits!

A "fact" attached to migration that was obliterated during the Brexit Yes campaign alongside creating the make believe gains attached to leaving a large common market and going it alone.

The tabloid media in the UK planted a very fertile field for Brexiteers to harvest.

 

Share this post


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

The pro-EU arguments beyond medium-term economics are weak..

The pro-Brexit arguments beyond denying free passage to secure quieter people living next door are also weak. :-)

On economics. Ask any Brexit supporter this question; "Are they willing to accept the prospects of a recession, higher interest rates, lower property values and having negative equity in their home as the price to pay for leaving the EU??" All you get in reply is coughing and spluttering.

It appears many of these people are now reconsidering their viewpoint. Either that or they are have already started tucking into their stockpile of German cough medicine. 

Share this post


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

The best arguments against BREXIT are Bori Johnson and Rees-Mogg...

The UK may have slipped in many areas but they remain World #1 for producing great political characters and cartoonists. 

images (89).jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ability of the Brexiteers to get their message across, albeit a lot of it total bullshit, is first class and something the Brexit No crowd or the Prime Minister packaging Brexit Yes representing the referendum Yes outcome, but EU centric, have failed at properly communicating the downside to the public until just recently. Over two years wasted.

The No crowd need to improve their communication skills quick smart to match the Yes. The fact the Tories (outside the Brexiteers) haven't cottoned onto this for well over two years following the Referendum then a disastrous General election going from a majority to minority Government is quite appalling.

These two Brexiteer Used Car Salesman at a "Leave Means Leave" rally just last night, one a ex UKIP leader and Member of the European Parliament, the other a Tory backbencher who likes top hats, may well be preaching to the converted here, but their communication skills are Gold Class.

 

 

Share this post


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

The pro-EU arguments beyond medium-term economics are weak..

The pro leave arguments are beyond uncertain future gains are weak. :)
But if leave voters believe in this in a majority, lets go for it.
I am done arguing over why people voted leave but I got an idea now why they did, though it was partly based on weird facts (to put it mildly) and with campaigns with dubious money. Still no problem, but the difference was so small you will have  lot of disgruntled people, which ever way it goes.
Oh and reacting to a troll like Sailabout, why bother.

On a new referendum, we do not know how they will vote, it seems the division is solid, at least on the surface. A new referendum will only influence the decision if remain wins in big numbers. Some just do not want to be in the club, and there are a lot of them.
Main reasons;

  • Adoption of the Euro as the UK’s only currency
  • The UK becoming a state within a federalised Europe as opposed to its own sovereign nation
  • The UK’s constitution and government structure being replaced by a federal, continental system covering the whole of the EU (this include immigration, EU and Non EU)
  • A loss of the cultural identity of the UK as a European identity is dictated upon us

Bringing me to the question what will happen in the next decade. In case of Brexit, in any way, there will be 10 yrs of arguments to solve all the problems. 10 years of bickering and politic shenanigans in the UK. If some problems like the NI question can be solved without troubles.

So I started this morning with a coffee and lets find a good book how the future of the UK will be with brexit.
Did read those two book selections, and by only reading the writers opinion about the books you already know not to expect to much of consensus what it will bring.

https://fivebooks.com/category/world/europe/britain/brexit/
Brexit for bluffers seems to be a good choice :)

The future, nobody knows how it will work out, the sun will shine after Brexit too, and it will rain. I am sure about that.
The UK will shine as never before and the UK is doomed, nah, will be in between. But it will take a hit for a decade, if history is right (and it is not always, but generally is).
So a decade of political turmoil and worsening financial situation before it maybe gets better is most likely, but you can not blame EU any more.

 

Share this post


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

The ability of the Brexiteers to get their message across, albeit a lot of it total bullshit, is first class and something the Brexit No crowd or the Prime Minister packaging Brexit Yes representing the referendum Yes outcome, but EU centric, have failed

As I said in post #27 but doesn't hurt to reiterate.   I started the Farage clip but stopped 30 secs in.  I can't bear the sight or sound of that cockwobbler.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit off topic, but there's been a flurry of links to UK newspapers, most of which have been widely discredited, usually by articles in their competition. This is an interesting reference that presents some interesting numbers and considers why. It seems they are not only making stuff up, but reprinting what they are being supplied by PR or equivalent organisations, with little or no fact checking due to reduced resources. Interestingly, all the papers considered are pretty close to each other, belying the "broadsheet" and "gutter press" differentiation.

 

fig4.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laser1 said:

As I said in post #27 but doesn't hurt to reiterate.   I started the Farage clip but stopped 30 secs in.  I can't bear the sight or sound of that cockwobbler.

Laser he and Rees Mogg etc may be cockwobblers, but give them credit, they know how to appeal to and connect with cuntwobblers. Their opponents need serious cuntwobbling advice. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hump101 said:

A bit off topic, but there's been a flurry of links to UK newspapers, most of which have been widely discredited, usually by articles in their competition. This is an interesting reference that presents some interesting numbers and considers why. It seems they are not only making stuff up, but reprinting what they are being supplied by PR or equivalent organisations, with little or no fact checking due to reduced resources. Interestingly, all the papers considered are pretty close to each other, belying the "broadsheet" and "gutter press" differentiation.

 

fig4.jpeg

Hump that represents a modern tragedy worldwide where serious journalists and even commentators (a distinction most cuntwobblers can't differentiate  between) are struggling to find an employer anymore to work for at a salary and so pay their home mortgage and send their kids to school anymore in the low cost media digital world.

Hence I buy 3 newspapers per day one national, 2 international, paper and or paywall depending where I am in the world in the hope to keep them employed.

Like everything in life we get what we pay for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/13/2018 at 5:00 PM, Sailabout said:

give Northern Ireland back to Ireland and all the problems go away it seems, then have a hard brexit and let the german business people help with a trade deal.

Cant lose a trade dispute when you have a  trade deficit.

"All the problems go away"?  The problem is that The Troubles are likely to return. If you don't know that you may not know enough about the situation to make the sneering and arrogant comments you've made about a difficult situation.

 

 

Share this post


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

Hump that represents a modern tragedy worldwide where serious journalists and even commentators (a distinction most cuntwobblers can't differentiate  between) are struggling to find an employer anymore to work for at a salary and so pay their home mortgage and send their kids to school anymore in the low cost media digital world.

Hence I buy 3 newspapers per day one national, 2 international, paper and or paywall depending where I am in the world in the hope to keep them employed.

Like everything in life we get what we pay for.

I grew up with the post-watergate idea that journalists were the honesty police who kept an independent eye on everybody, including themselves. It was probably naive even then, but I do seriously wonder where this regulation will come from in future. It can't come from governments, by definition, or industry, and it seems the public's appetite for reasoned and informed debate has diminished to an extent that most are not prepared to pay what it will require to maintain it, or even recognise the need for it. Maybe the fact-checking internet sites will be the future, as long as the facts are available to check?

As an academic, it is saddening to see that scientist are developing informal networks so that they can openly discuss real data because in some fields it is not possible to do so in traditional conference settings without impacting funding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps the EU simply needs to start turning back migrants and refugees from non-EU countries.

The admittance of large numbers of migrants and refugees has fueled the rise of right-wing parties in Hungary, Austria, Sweden, and other EU countries, and also was a major factor in the Brexit vote.  Admitting these people was the humanitarian thing to do and is likely to have economic benefits for countries that have a shortage of low-skilled labor, so it might be the right thing to do from a rational perspective, but it also clearly creates political problems. 

Another way to look at it is that there are approximately 500 million people in the EU and perhaps six times that many in Africa, the Middle East, and southern Asia.  The EU isn't big enough to be the safety valve.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

The EU isn't big enough to be the safety valve.

But that does not deter those refugees, war driven or economic, to see the EU as the honey pot of the Western World.  But that has little to do with brexshit.

Share this post


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

As an academic, it is saddening to see that scientist are developing informal networks so that they can openly discuss real data because in some fields it is not possible to do so in traditional conference settings without impacting funding.

Really, that is unsettling.

Papers, online journalist platform is the way to go for some, the Dutch version is running for years;
they want to expand to English.
https://thecorrespondent.com/

 

Share this post


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

On a new referendum, we do not know how they will vote, it seems the division is solid, at least on the surface. A new referendum will only influence the decision if remain wins in big numbers.

Leo I thought exactly like you until a couple of days  ago that a People's  Vote would be around 50/50 and solving nothing.

However I have just seen some polling figures (paywall I can't linky and a piece of insider intel) indicating the No Brexit has already overtaken the Yes nearly 2:1 after Undecided. That roughly translates to approaching 60/40 against but with all the vagaries of polling, probably means nothing other than a trend line.

However the interesting thing is the electoral balance in those poll numbers which everyone in Westminster of note now knows. It is not Tory favoured but Labor votors shifting from Yes to No Brexit. That is sending Corbyn in a spin as both his own electorate is No Brexit, notwithstanding his personal position is Yes Brexit. He wants everyone to wear the same uncomfortable Lenin like clothing and nationalise all sorts of things like transport whether it be catching a train to France but you can't step on for the return journey without a Blue UK Passport.

May knows this shift in public opinion is not Tory but Labour so can't move other to now cook her Tory opponents and others slowly somehow over the Xmas New Year Period. She can now do so with the benefit her own party can't topple her anymore after Wednesdays vote but when the EU have made it abundantly clear they will negotiate no further. So nothing has really changed internationaly.

Therefore the Poker game over Xmas/New Year is May against the Brexit disidents in her own party who will accept a No Deal and avoiding a People's Vote like the plague which will murder them. In concert with that is the Labour Party are moving quickly to a People's Vote whether Corbyn likes it or not and blowing up his ideal of a early no confidence in the govetnment predicated General Election.

May has managed to keep the Irish from pulling the pin do keep her Government alive when around one in three of her own are happy to blow her and their own government  under the bus. She has done the Maggie Thatcher handbag routine against the EU albeit it means nothing but looks as though she is doing something for public consumption in the tabloids, but where majority of readers probably hate her, but are open to recognising respect.

Meanwhile the Labor party against the wishes of their leader are moving towards a People's Vote at a 100mph and may save her the trouble of calling for that. Then look at the two most elequent Brexiteers, Farage the influential independant pushing for a People's Vote and her own Judas, Rees Mogg wanting to avoid that like the plague, knowing the outcome. BTW Farage must be brain dead still pushing that.

Leo I think the Prime Minister is well ahead of both of us on the People Vote subject and plays the violin very well both in Brussels and London.

All said, fuck knows how this plays out. There is no precedent for it.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

"All the problems go away"?  The problem is that The Troubles are likely to return. If you don't know that you may not know enough about the situation to make the sneering and arrogant comments you've made about a difficult situation.

Curious you said what many here couldn't be bothered doing so.

Sail has no fucking idea how many have died in decades and over generations just to get to the Good Friday Agreement settled 9 years ago this month, a peace agreement that allowed people to go out and have a beer with no fear they wouldn't make it home. A Brexit that blew that up at the stroke of a pen that no sensible human or UK government of any political persuasion will ever agree to went straight over his head.

Sail obviously hasn't any idea about Irish drinking and survival habits and is certainly not a U2 fan.

 

Share this post


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

Doctor friend of mine working in Guys Hospital, said constant stream of ambulances from Portsmouth, most had long term issues not accidents on board.

Let’s see a cite or two for that, along with some real numbers and background please. 

Share this post


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

the brits voted out, just highlighting long term issues that they are all fed up with

here's one example

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2634198/Hamza-We-mistake-treating-jailed-hate-cleric-ranter-real-threat-admits-former-chief-prosecutor.html

Quoting the Mail and the Express is like using Fox for a fair and balanced source. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 Some just do not want to be in the club, and there are a lot of them.

 

Main reasons;

  • Adoption of the Euro as the UK’s only currency
  • The UK becoming a state within a federalised Europe as opposed to its own sovereign nation
  • The UK’s constitution and government structure being replaced by a federal, continental system covering the whole of the EU (this include immigration, EU and Non EU)
  • A loss of the cultural identity of the UK as a European identity is dictated upon us

 

Its a bit worrying if those are the reasons that people voted in favor of Brexit (because they are all inaccurate):

  • The UK has had its own currency- sterling- within the EU for 45 years and there is no proposal suggesting that the UK adopt the Euro. You can thank Maggie for that.
  • Each country within the EU remains a sovereign nation
  • The UK does not have a constitution. See #2 above.
  • The Brits will always talk in English, the French language will remain French , and the Germans will speak German.  There are 24 official major languages in Europe and that is not including  the Basques, the Catalans and the Mennonites in Cyprus.  The is ABSOLUTELY zero chance of a common language and common cultural identity.  

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Let’s see a cite or two for that, along with some real numbers and background please. 

Mad scrub the doctor that dropped Sail at birth..he isn't good at filling forms in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The #1 reason to remain in the EU is that it is a massive free trade zone.  If you set up a small factory in UK or launch your own online store, you have a market of 512 million people vs a market of 60 million. The economic benefits are staggeringly obvious, There is a reason why USA businesses are so successful- they start with a massive home market..

The reasons to leave the EU are:

#1 Bureaucracy.   A  truly common market, the so-called single European market, requires common standards so that businesses can compete on a level playing field. Just as the FDA in the US sets federal standards for the manufacture of medical drugs.....it would be unfair if a Turkish bucket shop could sell cheaply manufactured sub-standard drugs in the UK while the  British company incurs the costs of clean rooms and high standards etc.  European free trade required establishing European wide common standards,  required a European bureaucracy in Brussels ....and Brits hate bureaucrats!   To be fair to the Brits,  the bureaucrats are not subject to the same level of democratic control in the EU as they are elsewhere 

#2 Immigration. In addition to the free movement of goods, the EU adopted the free movement of labour. The UK was a HUGE beneficiary of this policy to the detriment of their neighbors because the brightest and best wanted to live in London. The EU led to a renaissance of London as a financial and commercial capital in the world.  The refugee issues then diminished the UK's enthusiasm for the free movement of labor.  Its a bloody silly reason to quit the free trade zone (other ways to fix the issue) but the "leavers" played on people's fears. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/14/2018 at 4:32 AM, Sailabout said:

There's more, the UK has a deal where they do medical care for all Mariners, so ships load half dead and dying crew on board just to get to UK ports, call ambulance and go to hospital yet no bond from the ship required, so they are just left in the UK I assume?

Sail, in addition to Mad questioning you on the above.  There is something like MCA and Border Force pre-arrival reporting for all vessels arriving in British ports, Port-Health declarations/inspections, Port-State inspections and last but not least MLC-2006 where ship owners are duty bound to look after the living & working conditions of their crews and have to offer and are liable for any medical care in-country and/or repatriation to their home country.  That cost burden is on the shoulders of ship owners, not the NHS. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea that the UK can replace the economic benefits of a massive single home market with a few trade agreements is so absurd , it is laughable.

Will the US suddenly waive FDA requirements for medical devices made in the UK? No!.  Will the UK make itself subject to the FDA? No!

Will Australia allow British insurance companies to sell life insurance in New South Wales without being subject to APRA?  No! of course not.  Will the UK subject its insurance companies to the regulation of APRA?  No

and so on and on.    

The single market of Europe, where a UK company can sell its good and services to a common standard across 500 million people will disappear if there is a hard Brexit. The turkeys voted for Thanksgiving!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Laser1 said:

Sail, in addition to Mad questioning you on the above.  There is something like MCA and Border Force pre-arrival reporting for all vessels arriving in British ports, Port-Health declarations/inspections, Port-State inspections and last but not least MLC-2006 where ship owners are duty bound to look after the living & working conditions of their crews and have to offer and are liable for any medical care in-country and/or repatriation to their home country.  That cost burden is on the shoulders of ship owners, not the NHS. 

you are quoting mlc stuff in recent years, I was quoting the reality on the ground for many years prior and I would assume still the same

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the EU is so good how come the Switzerland eh the EEA country s dont join up?

Or should we say we ask if your not bankrupt or going to be why join?

Share this post


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

you are quoting mlc stuff in recent years, I was quoting the reality on the ground for many years prior and I would assume still the same

Any chance of seeing some cites for your claims? 

Share this post


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

The #1 reason to remain in the EU is that it is a massive free trade zone. 

It is also a massive collective rort under one umbrella, albeit for obvious reasons, to gain parity on the world stage. It was a good decision and still good for them today, that is why the UK joined 45 years ago.

BTW everyone forgets those countries wanting to join this EU rort having been denied. For instance I think Turkey first applied around 30 years ago, but still waiting.

However under that rort, the UK still struggles to make a buck? WTF.

The Brexiteers if true to their word is the UK would be better off in a free market. OK then how will the average UK agricultural producer who today relies upon 50% of their income coming from EU subsidies survive in that free world?

Answer is simple. They won't and will be chewed up and spat out. The equivalent costs of agricultural production in most non EU countries leave many in the EU for dead, particularly the UK. If it wasnt for the Republic of Ireland the UK would arguably starve, simply because their UK cousins are one of the most agriculturaly inefficient on planet earth, despite every natural agricultural advantage going. 

Maybe the Brexiteers should think about UK agricultural producers raising their game to match world standards of efficiency before thinking that closing their sole subsidised shopfront is the solution?? If there is any doubt about comparive world wide efficiency, why are countries with agricultural products already or about to enter into trade agreements with the EU? The same agreements by the way the Brexiteers think will be suddenly dropped in favour of them with a fraction of market size? That is crazy Mogg shit.

That said I'm sure those Brexit supporters  regard Boris and Ress Mogg having set foot on a Polo field one weekend and thinking it was a farm/grazing property that also supplied chips to McDonalds, that the cost of feeding a family in the UK will reduce under Brexit. A cost of a decent piece of meat will increase by over 50% under the Boris/Ress Mogg Brexit dinner plan. That is guaranteed.

There is some comfort though for the Yes Brexit crowd that Rees Mogg Snr if, God forbid was ever run over by a bus, he has a Mini-Me in waiting to help England sell potatoes to the world at €2 each.

Jacob-Rees-Mogg-705661.jpg

Share this post


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

Any chance of seeing some cites for your claims? 

Seeing those citations, about as likely as Boris and Trump both going a week without untruths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites