[Continuation] Brexit: Now What? 9 Below Zero - Page 26

P.J. Denyer · 10th October 2019, 02:35 AM

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal

The government tried to implement the decision and the ERG, DUP and Bojo at al prevented them from doing so.

What you're failing to understand is that in Brexit World you have to accept everything the losers of the vote warned about while the winners get to completely redefine their intended outcome.

Blue Bubble · 10th October 2019, 02:38 AM

Mrs Blue Bubble just sent me this:

Quote:

Dear ....,

We still want to wait until the end of October, if the Brexit comes. If so, it will be difficult and expensive for Professor .... to come to the UK, then a visa has to be applied for and it's not worth it for 1 day.

Best regards,

Samson · 10th October 2019, 02:47 AM

Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer

What you're failing to understand is that in Brexit World you have to accept everything the losers of the vote warned about while the winners get to completely redefine their intended outcome.

Sqeegee Beckingham said it perfectly.
I will repeat without referring to their perfect post.

25 people entered a room.

13 wanted one outcome.
12 wanted one outcome.

the 13 won a straw poll.

Then they agreed they had differential wishes.

The 12 now claim that the 13 have run the clock and are statistically extinct.

BadBoy · 10th October 2019, 02:49 AM

Originally Posted by ceptimus

That's pretty simplistic. First YOU should answer the question, 'Why are economics more important than anything else? Provide your justification of your assertion.'

Well, without trying to straw man you - because you just said "anything else" let me assume you mean economic migration.

Believe it or not I do think there is a limit to the amount of immigration - skilled or otherwise - a country can sustain without its population starting to feel resentful of a feeling of erosion of their culture. Having said that:

1. Population growth as skilled migration is important to grow an economy. Maybe that's not important to you? Fair enough but it seems that most general elections the economy is usually the punching bag most used by an opposition.

2. Many of the people I have listened to about this appear to conflate EU migrant workers with the recent decade long wave of asylum seekers, illegal immigrants and people migrating to the UK on skilled migration Visas - all of which has little to do with the EU - or could be negotiated within the EU. I admit this is anecdotal though.

3. I personally see British Nationalism as a nasty vein running through the UK and yet oddly paradoxical given the often British sense of fair play and fight for the underdog. I will always be an Englishman, sometimes proud, sometimes embarrassed but not because of some ill conceived Nationalism and blind allegiance to the Queen. The history of the UK (I think) can be seen in the filter of common men and women overcoming oppression and exploitation. I know this sounds like something from Socialist Worker but the fact remains Human Rights has roots in Britain, and they didn't come easily. See https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/...rights-britain. When I say I'm proud to be English, that's what I'm talking about, not some romantic glorification of a defunct colonial super power.

I'm no pacifist, but I wouldn't fight for my Queen. I would for my countries freedom and the freedoms of its people (within obvious limits of course - I'm generally against violence of any sort and certainly not to achieve ends) .

GlennB · 10th October 2019, 02:50 AM

"In an interview on ITV’s Peston last night Andrea Leadsom, the business secretary, suggested that, if Boris Johnson has to write a letter to the EU requesting a Brexit extension - which is what the Benn Act says he will have to do, if there is no deal - he might also send a second letter, making points intended to persuade EU leaders against granting an extension. "

Perhaps this was what ~~Rasputin~~ Cummings meant by being prepared to spend the last 2 weeks of October in the courts?

Still, it's massively dim of her to mention it. Or deliberate ****-stirring?

Captain_Swoop · 10th October 2019, 03:28 AM

Secretary of State @BrandonLewis confirms that EU citizens in UK WILL be subject to full immigration enforcement and liable to removal if they miss Settled Status deadline in exclusive Interview with @StefanieBolzen in Germany's @welt

Lothian · 10th October 2019, 03:35 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

More good news if there's a no-deal Brexit, travel insurance costs are going to rise because most EU countries will no longer accept EHIC cards.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-49989227

No possible downside, only a considerable upside

In other good news OECD proposals to tax in the place of consumption looks set to come into effect in 2020, scuppering any North West European Island's plans to become a tax haven for international companies.

The Don · 10th October 2019, 03:45 AM

Originally Posted by Lothian

In other good news OECD proposals to tax in the place of consumption looks set to come into effect in 2020, scuppering any North West European Island's plans to become a tax haven for international companies.

In which case we'll push for BrOECDxit as well

Lothian · 10th October 2019, 04:00 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

In which case we'll push for BrOECDxit as well

Given the OECD is not overseen by British courts we will not be giving up our sovereignty by joining such an undemocratic organisation.
That said the incentive for businesses to locate in a low tax UK will go if they still get taxed around the world.

ohms · 10th October 2019, 04:47 AM

Originally Posted by GlennB

"In an interview on ITV’s Peston last night Andrea Leadsom, the business secretary, suggested that, if Boris Johnson has to write a letter to the EU requesting a Brexit extension - which is what the Benn Act says he will have to do, if there is no deal - he might also send a second letter, making points intended to persuade EU leaders against granting an extension. "

Perhaps this was what ~~Rasputin~~ Cummings meant by being prepared to spend the last 2 weeks of October in the courts?

Still, it's massively dim of her to mention it. Or deliberate ****-stirring?

As usual, there's a David Allen Green post for that:

https://davidallengreen.com/2019/09/...-the-benn-act/

Darat · 10th October 2019, 04:51 AM

Originally Posted by Francesca R

The best argument for not Corbyn in my view is that the caretaker PM (whose only tasks should be to get a brextension and call an election after that) should be essentially a technocrat who "doesn't want to be PM". Rather than the guy who wants to be the next PM. (I think it was you who made this argument)

But the other thing is that anyone is better than nobody, even Corbyn.

I agree.

Darat · 10th October 2019, 04:53 AM

Originally Posted by ceptimus

You should understand the difference between the promises made by government and those made by campaigns.

That government hasn't been in power for quite some time. It is an unusual viewpoint that the current parliament should have to keep to what a previous government promised.

catsmate · 10th October 2019, 06:31 AM

Originally Posted by ceptimus

"The People" didn't for for exiting the EU without a deal, did they?

catsmate · 10th October 2019, 06:32 AM

Originally Posted by dudalb

I find it incredible that some in the UK still refuse to admit the UK geographically is part of Europe and the days of "splendid Isolation" are over.

The 'Imperial Delusion' is still strong with some.

catsmate · 10th October 2019, 06:34 AM

Originally Posted by ceptimus

That's pretty simplistic.

Originally Posted by ceptimus

First YOU should answer the question,

Originally Posted by ceptimus

'Why are economics more important than anything else? Provide your justification of your assertion.'

Because economic reality effects everything else.

catsmate · 10th October 2019, 06:36 AM

Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop

Secretary of State @BrandonLewis confirms that EU citizens in UK WILL be subject to full immigration enforcement and liable to removal if they miss Settled Status deadline in exclusive Interview with @StefanieBolzen in Germany's @welt

One hopes he needs critical medical treatment provided by the NHS in November...

Francesca R · 10th October 2019, 06:37 AM

With respect to trading brexit in the markets, amazingly the conventional wisdom seems to be no deal bad (for GBP and FTSE, opposite for gilts), deal good, extension nothing much . . . .

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...rexit-outcomes

ceptimus · 10th October 2019, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

That government hasn't been in power for quite some time. It is an unusual viewpoint that the current parliament should have to keep to what a previous government promised.

Not when the incoming government (and the main opposition party for that matter) promised to honour the result of the referendum in their 2017 manifestos.

The Don · 10th October 2019, 08:36 AM

More Brexit good news, or more accurately another update on something which has been brought up repeatedly. In the event of a no-deal, Nissan would consider shutting down their complete European operations.

Quote:

Japanese carmaker Nissan has warned that a no-deal Brexit could make its European business model unsustainable.

Nissan's European chairman, Gianluca de Ficchy, said if a 10% export tariff was introduced after the UK left the EU it would put its operations "in jeopardy".

This would be case if the UK moved to World Trade Organization (WTO) rules after Brexit, he said.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50000530

I suppose some Brexiteers may consider it a "win" because in addition to 7,000 jobs being lost in the UK, there would be 5,000 jobs lost in Spain as well.

Garrison · 10th October 2019, 09:45 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

That government hasn't been in power for quite some time. It is an unusual viewpoint that the current parliament should have to keep to what a previous government promised.

It should also be borne in mind that a number of those making the promises during the referendum are the government now...

Garrison · 10th October 2019, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by ceptimus

Not when the incoming government (and the main opposition party for that matter) promised to honour the result of the referendum in their 2017 manifestos.

So obviously now that those who made all those outlandish promises on behalf of the Leave campaign are the government you naturally expect them to deliver £350 million a week for the NHS and a trade deal as good or better than the one we have as members of the EU?

Darat · 10th October 2019, 10:04 AM

Originally Posted by ceptimus

Not when the incoming government (and the main opposition party for that matter) promised to honour the result of the referendum in their 2017 manifestos.

Then you need to be taking the likes of Smith, Mogg and Johnson to task for not keeping the manifesto promises they made when they repeatedly voted to keep the UK in the EU.

ceptimus · 10th October 2019, 10:17 AM

Originally Posted by Darat

Then you need to be taking the likes of Smith, Mogg and Johnson to task for not keeping the manifesto promises they made when they repeatedly voted to keep the UK in the EU.

When did they do that?

Darat · 10th October 2019, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by ceptimus

When did they do that?

Your memory must be going, you've posted about them not voting to leave the EU only a few weeks ago!

ceptimus · 10th October 2019, 11:06 AM

So when you say they voted to keep the UK in the EU, you actually meant they voted for the so-called, "Mrs May's EU withdrawal agreement."

So the opposite of what you said. No wonder I didn't understand.

As you know, I didn't think that was a good way to leave the EU. I'm glad it didn't pass and that we now have a chance to leave the EU in a more complete manner.

Actually, I still don't fully understand what you're claiming - as far as I know, Mogg only voted for May's deal once. What did you mean by 'repeatedly'?

Darat · 10th October 2019, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by ceptimus

So when you say they voted to keep the UK in the EU, you actually meant they voted for the so-called, "Mrs May's EU withdrawal agreement."

So the opposite of what you said. No wonder I didn't understand.

As you know, I didn't think that was a good way to leave the EU. I'm glad it didn't pass and that we now have a chance to leave the EU in a more complete manner.

Actually, I still don't fully understand what you're claiming - as far as I know, Mogg only voted for May's deal once. What did you mean by 'repeatedly'?

Opposite world must be a wonderful place.

Captain_Swoop · 10th October 2019, 12:58 PM

2016:
“EU citizens will have the exact same rights as before”
“Stop scaring EU citizens with Project Fear. Nothing will change!”

2019:
“Deport the *******!”

ceptimus · 10th October 2019, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by Darat

Opposite world must be a wonderful place.

You're not making any sense. Perhaps that's your deliberate intention.

Lothian · 10th October 2019, 01:54 PM

Originally Posted by ceptimus

So when you say they voted to keep the UK in the EU, you actually meant they voted for the so-called, "Mrs May's EU withdrawal agreement."

As you know, I didn't think that was a good way to leave the EU. I'm glad it didn't pass.

The referendum was to leave, May's deal was to leave. If you, Boris and other brexiteers can happily betray 17.4 million people you can not complain when others look to do the same.

GlennB · 10th October 2019, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by ceptimus

So when you say they voted to keep the UK in the EU, you actually meant they voted for the so-called, "Mrs May's EU withdrawal agreement."
...
As you know, I didn't think that was a good way to leave the EU. I'm glad it didn't pass and that we now have a chance to leave the EU in a more complete manner.

Did you vote for 'a manner' of leaving the EU? I didn't notice any mentioned on the ballot paper.

ceptimus · 10th October 2019, 04:05 PM

Originally Posted by Lothian

The referendum was to leave, May's deal was to leave. If you, Boris and other brexiteers can happily betray 17.4 million people you can not complain when others look to do the same.

This is nonsense and you know it. At the time of the votes it was THE LAW that we would leave on Halloween either with or without a deal. Mogg and others mostly voted against May's deal because they thought no deal was a better way of leaving.

Mogg changed to voting for the deal on the third occasion because, by then he feared that remainers were in the ascendancy and that the choice was between May's deal and no Brexit at all. He has since stated that he now regrets having voted for the deal.

It's clear that Mogg and other ERG members, whether or not they voted for May's deal once, are all committed to leaving the EU. Only an idiot would argue otherwise.

The remainers who voted against the deal - Grieve and his pals - did so because they were opposed to any form of Brexit. Grieve will likely still vote against any deal Boris brings back from next week's summit (if the EU offer one) He is a fanatical remainer and a clear liar and hypocrite for having the gall to stand as a Tory in the 2017 election where their manifesto clearly stated that no deal was a definite possibility.

SezMe · 10th October 2019, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by McHrozni

Economy was on the top of the reasons to vote Brexit.<snip>

That may well be but that does not mean that it should have been so. The Remainers let the Leavers set the terms of the debate, much to their loss.

I think ceptimus is right. I think there should have been three pillars to the debate: social welfare, economic welfare and environmental sustainability. Too bad the Leavers made the second one drown out the other two.

Lothian · 10th October 2019, 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by ceptimus

This is nonsense and you know it. At the time of the votes it was THE LAW that we would leave on Halloween either with or without a deal. Mogg and others mostly voted against May's deal because they thought no deal was a better way of leaving.

Mogg changed to voting for the deal on the third occasion because, by then he feared that remainers were in the ascendancy and that the choice was between May's deal and no Brexit at all. He has since stated that he now regrets having voted for the deal.

It's clear that Mogg and other ERG members, whether or not they voted for May's deal once, are all committed to leaving the EU. Only an idiot would argue otherwise.

The remainers who voted against the deal - Grieve and his pals - did so because they were opposed to any form of Brexit. Grieve will likely still vote against any deal Boris brings back from next week's summit (if the EU offer one) He is a fanatical remainer and a clear liar and hypocrite for having the gall to stand as a Tory in the 2017 election where their manifesto clearly stated that no deal was a definite possibility.

You are missing the point.

May's deal would have delivered the referendum promise to leave the EU. That leavers opposed it shows us that we can not assume that any particular leave deal has the popular support. We can not say that May's deal is what the public voted for. Similarly we can not say that a hard brexit is what people voted for.
You have shown the referendum can not be relied upon. Thank you for that.

McHrozni · 10th October 2019, 11:04 PM

Originally Posted by SezMe

That may well be but that does not mean that it should have been so. The Remainers let the Leavers set the terms of the debate, much to their loss.

I think ceptimus is right. I think there should have been three pillars to the debate: social welfare, economic welfare and environmental sustainability. Too bad the Leavers made the second one drown out the other two.

Plus Brexit makes the other two worse by default.

We're left with "soverignty", "standing independently" and other such meaningless phrases.

McHrozni

Ulf Nereng · 11th October 2019, 12:14 AM

Or "taking back control". I have often wondered which EU regulations are supposed to be so bad. Is it such a great idea to have lower standards than EU does? I've only been affected directly by an EU regulation once that I am aware of; when my city council was forced to improve the water supply because it didn't meet EU's minimum standards. It had become undrinkable at times, but now it is fine again. But I'm sure local UK authorites can save a lot of money when they are "back in control"...

The Don · 11th October 2019, 12:37 AM

Originally Posted by Ulf Nereng

Or "taking back control". I have often wondered which EU regulations are supposed to be so bad. Is it such a great idea to have lower standards than EU does? I've only been affected directly by an EU regulation once that I am aware of; when my city council was forced to improve the water supply because it didn't meet EU's minimum standards. It had become undrinkable at times, but now it is fine again. But I'm sure local UK authorites can save a lot of money when they are "back in control"...

Indeed, the question of the bad EU regulations has been raised regularly and whenever an answer is given it invariably turns out to be a partial or complete lie. Boris Johnson recently waved a kipper around declaring that EU regulations forced UK producers to ship them with an ice pack. This was simply untrue, the regulation in question was a UK regulation.

In other cases, such as bendy bananas or not being able to sell bananas singly (or in too large bunches, the story changes), it turns out to be a wilful misinterpretation of the relevant EU legislation.

At least one of the claims that regularly crops up (not being able to call British sausages, sausages because of their low meat content - instead they have to be called offal tubes) comes directly from a comedy series.

The UK has voted in favour of 98% or so of EU legislation and has an opt out for the important parts of the remaining 2%. Any international relationship is going to involve both parties accepting some terms they are less than thrilled with. If the UK thinks that the EU has been unfair, wait until we see the terms of the US/UK trade deal.

Ultimately it all goes back to cowardly UK governments of all kinds blaming unpopular legislation on the EU (whether or not they had anything to do with it) and claiming credit for popular EU legislation for 40+ years. That kind of propaganda is likely to leave a very biased impression of the EU.

Samson · 11th October 2019, 01:03 AM

Originally Posted by The Don

Indeed, the question of the bad EU regulations has been raised regularly and whenever an answer is given it invariably turns out to be a partial or complete lie. Boris Johnson recently waved a kipper around declaring that EU regulations forced UK producers to ship them with an ice pack. This was simply untrue, the regulation in question was a UK regulation.

In other cases, such as bendy bananas or not being able to sell bananas singly (or in too large bunches, the story changes), it turns out to be a wilful misinterpretation of the relevant EU legislation.

At least one of the claims that regularly crops up (not being able to call British sausages, sausages because of their low meat content - instead they have to be called offal tubes) comes directly from a comedy series.

The UK has voted in favour of 98% or so of EU legislation and has an opt out for the important parts of the remaining 2%. Any international relationship is going to involve both parties accepting some terms they are less than thrilled with. If the UK thinks that the EU has been unfair, wait until we see the terms of the US/UK trade deal.

Ultimately it all goes back to cowardly UK governments of all kinds blaming unpopular legislation on the EU (whether or not they had anything to do with it) and claiming credit for popular EU legislation for 40+ years. That kind of propaganda is likely to leave a very biased impression of the EU.

Good post The Don.
I have sent on this text to a couple of English friends here who disagree on Brexit.

The Don · 11th October 2019, 01:32 AM

Interesting video from an ardent Remainer describing what may have just happened in Ireland and how this will lead to a no-deal.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Summary:

Boris Johnson has likely agreed to a deal involving a border in the Irish Sea
He brings this deal to parliament
Parliament approves it
There isn't sufficient time to pass the other legislation to enable the deal to be put into law by 31 October
The UK crashes out with no deal as planned

The ERG and DUP vote in favour of the deal because they know that the deal will never actually be implemented.

Vixen · 11th October 2019, 01:35 AM

Originally Posted by ceptimus

This is nonsense and you know it. At the time of the votes it was THE LAW that we would leave on Halloween either with or without a deal. Mogg and others mostly voted against May's deal because they thought no deal was a better way of leaving.

Mogg changed to voting for the deal on the third occasion because, by then he feared that remainers were in the ascendancy and that the choice was between May's deal and no Brexit at all. He has since stated that he now regrets having voted for the deal.

It's clear that Mogg and other ERG members, whether or not they voted for May's deal once, are all committed to leaving the EU. Only an idiot would argue otherwise.

The remainers who voted against the deal - Grieve and his pals - did so because they were opposed to any form of Brexit. Grieve will likely still vote against any deal Boris brings back from next week's summit (if the EU offer one) He is a fanatical remainer and a clear liar and hypocrite for having the gall to stand as a Tory in the 2017 election where their manifesto clearly stated that no deal was a definite possibility.

LOL Rabid Brexiteer wants to hang Grieve, Gauke, Hammond and 'the Father of the House' from the nearest lamp posts as 'traitors'.

A rabid Brexiteer cannot retain a facade of reasonableness and composure for any length of time without phrases like, 'He is a fanatical remainer and a clear liar and hypocrite for having the gall to stand as a Tory in the 2017 election', bursting forth unrestrained.

3point14 · 11th October 2019, 01:42 AM

Nigel has finally fessed up about who he's working for.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...an-propaganda?

10th October 2019, 02:35 AM	#1001
P.J. Denyer Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,997	Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal The government tried to implement the decision and the ERG, DUP and Bojo at al prevented them from doing so. What you're failing to understand is that in Brexit World you have to accept everything the losers of the vote warned about while the winners get to completely redefine their intended outcome.
P.J. Denyer Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 7,997	__________________ "I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion "Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills

10th October 2019, 02:38 AM	#1002
Blue Bubble Sharper than a thorn Join Date: May 2005 Location: Duxford, Cambridgeshire, UK Posts: 5,252	Mrs Blue Bubble just sent me this: Quote: Dear ...., We still want to wait until the end of October, if the Brexit comes. If so, it will be difficult and expensive for Professor .... to come to the UK, then a visa has to be applied for and it's not worth it for 1 day. Best regards,
	__________________ eⁱ^π+43

10th October 2019, 02:47 AM	#1003
Samson Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 9,483	Originally Posted by P.J. Denyer What you're failing to understand is that in Brexit World you have to accept everything the losers of the vote warned about while the winners get to completely redefine their intended outcome. Sqeegee Beckingham said it perfectly. I will repeat without referring to their perfect post. 25 people entered a room. 13 wanted one outcome. 12 wanted one outcome. the 13 won a straw poll. Then they agreed they had differential wishes. The 12 now claim that the 13 have run the clock and are statistically extinct.
Samson Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 9,483

10th October 2019, 02:49 AM	#1004
BadBoy Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,499	Originally Posted by ceptimus That's pretty simplistic. First YOU should answer the question, 'Why are economics more important than anything else? Provide your justification of your assertion.' Well, without trying to straw man you - because you just said "anything else" let me assume you mean economic migration. Believe it or not I do think there is a limit to the amount of immigration - skilled or otherwise - a country can sustain without its population starting to feel resentful of a feeling of erosion of their culture. Having said that: 1. Population growth as skilled migration is important to grow an economy. Maybe that's not important to you? Fair enough but it seems that most general elections the economy is usually the punching bag most used by an opposition. 2. Many of the people I have listened to about this appear to conflate EU migrant workers with the recent decade long wave of asylum seekers, illegal immigrants and people migrating to the UK on skilled migration Visas - all of which has little to do with the EU - or could be negotiated within the EU. I admit this is anecdotal though. 3. I personally see British Nationalism as a nasty vein running through the UK and yet oddly paradoxical given the often British sense of fair play and fight for the underdog. I will always be an Englishman, sometimes proud, sometimes embarrassed but not because of some ill conceived Nationalism and blind allegiance to the Queen. The history of the UK (I think) can be seen in the filter of common men and women overcoming oppression and exploitation. I know this sounds like something from Socialist Worker but the fact remains Human Rights has roots in Britain, and they didn't come easily. See https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/...rights-britain. When I say I'm proud to be English, that's what I'm talking about, not some romantic glorification of a defunct colonial super power. I'm no pacifist, but I wouldn't fight for my Queen. I would for my countries freedom and the freedoms of its people (within obvious limits of course - I'm generally against violence of any sort and certainly not to achieve ends) .
BadBoy Graduate Poster Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,499	__________________ Go sell crazy someplace else we're all stocked up here Last edited by BadBoy; 10th October 2019 at 02:59 AM.

10th October 2019, 02:50 AM	#1005
GlennB Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Usk, Wales Posts: 26,531	"In an interview on ITV’s Peston last night Andrea Leadsom, the business secretary, suggested that, if Boris Johnson has to write a letter to the EU requesting a Brexit extension - which is what the Benn Act says he will have to do, if there is no deal - he might also send a second letter, making points intended to persuade EU leaders against granting an extension. " Perhaps this was what ~~Rasputin~~ Cummings meant by being prepared to spend the last 2 weeks of October in the courts? Still, it's massively dim of her to mention it. Or deliberate ****-stirring?
	__________________ "Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut

10th October 2019, 03:28 AM	#1006
Captain_Swoop Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 32,653	Secretary of State @BrandonLewis confirms that EU citizens in UK WILL be subject to full immigration enforcement and liable to removal if they miss Settled Status deadline in exclusive Interview with @StefanieBolzen in Germany's @welt

10th October 2019, 03:35 AM	#1007
Lothian should be banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside Posts: 16,218	Originally Posted by The Don More good news if there's a no-deal Brexit, travel insurance costs are going to rise because most EU countries will no longer accept EHIC cards. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-49989227 No possible downside, only a considerable upside In other good news OECD proposals to tax in the place of consumption looks set to come into effect in 2020, scuppering any North West European Island's plans to become a tax haven for international companies.

10th October 2019, 03:45 AM	#1008
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 31,593	Originally Posted by Lothian In other good news OECD proposals to tax in the place of consumption looks set to come into effect in 2020, scuppering any North West European Island's plans to become a tax haven for international companies. In which case we'll push for BrOECDxit as well

10th October 2019, 04:00 AM	#1009
Lothian should be banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside Posts: 16,218	Originally Posted by The Don In which case we'll push for BrOECDxit as well Given the OECD is not overseen by British courts we will not be giving up our sovereignty by joining such an undemocratic organisation. That said the incentive for businesses to locate in a low tax UK will go if they still get taxed around the world.

10th October 2019, 04:47 AM	#1010
ohms Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,326	Originally Posted by GlennB "In an interview on ITV’s Peston last night Andrea Leadsom, the business secretary, suggested that, if Boris Johnson has to write a letter to the EU requesting a Brexit extension - which is what the Benn Act says he will have to do, if there is no deal - he might also send a second letter, making points intended to persuade EU leaders against granting an extension. " Perhaps this was what ~~Rasputin~~ Cummings meant by being prepared to spend the last 2 weeks of October in the courts? Still, it's massively dim of her to mention it. Or deliberate ****-stirring? As usual, there's a David Allen Green post for that: https://davidallengreen.com/2019/09/...-the-benn-act/
ohms Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 1,326	__________________ Long time lurker

10th October 2019, 04:51 AM	#1011
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 97,752	Originally Posted by Francesca R The best argument for not Corbyn in my view is that the caretaker PM (whose only tasks should be to get a brextension and call an election after that) should be essentially a technocrat who "doesn't want to be PM". Rather than the guy who wants to be the next PM. (I think it was you who made this argument) But the other thing is that anyone is better than nobody, even Corbyn. I agree.
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

10th October 2019, 04:53 AM	#1012
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 97,752	Originally Posted by ceptimus You should understand the difference between the promises made by government and those made by campaigns. That government hasn't been in power for quite some time. It is an unusual viewpoint that the current parliament should have to keep to what a previous government promised.
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

10th October 2019, 06:31 AM	#1013
catsmate No longer the 1 Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 24,271	Originally Posted by ceptimus <snippage> "The People" didn't for for exiting the EU without a deal, did they?
	__________________ As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.

10th October 2019, 06:32 AM	#1014
catsmate No longer the 1 Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 24,271	Originally Posted by dudalb I find it incredible that some in the UK still refuse to admit the UK geographically is part of Europe and the days of "splendid Isolation" are over. The 'Imperial Delusion' is still strong with some.
	__________________ As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.

10th October 2019, 06:34 AM	#1015
catsmate No longer the 1 Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 24,271	Originally Posted by ceptimus That's pretty simplistic. Originally Posted by ceptimus First YOU should answer the question, Originally Posted by ceptimus 'Why are economics more important than anything else? Provide your justification of your assertion.' Because economic reality effects everything else.
	__________________ As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.

10th October 2019, 06:36 AM	#1016
catsmate No longer the 1 Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 24,271	Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop Secretary of State @BrandonLewis confirms that EU citizens in UK WILL be subject to full immigration enforcement and liable to removal if they miss Settled Status deadline in exclusive Interview with @StefanieBolzen in Germany's @welt One hopes he needs critical medical treatment provided by the NHS in November...
	__________________ As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.

10th October 2019, 06:37 AM	#1017
Francesca R Girl Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London EC1 Posts: 18,658	With respect to trading brexit in the markets, amazingly the conventional wisdom seems to be no deal bad (for GBP and FTSE, opposite for gilts), deal good, extension nothing much . . . . https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...rexit-outcomes

10th October 2019, 08:35 AM	#1018
ceptimus puzzler Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 6,460	Originally Posted by Darat That government hasn't been in power for quite some time. It is an unusual viewpoint that the current parliament should have to keep to what a previous government promised. Not when the incoming government (and the main opposition party for that matter) promised to honour the result of the referendum in their 2017 manifestos.
ceptimus puzzler Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 6,460

10th October 2019, 08:36 AM	#1019
The Don Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sir Fynwy Posts: 31,593	More Brexit good news, or more accurately another update on something which has been brought up repeatedly. In the event of a no-deal, Nissan would consider shutting down their complete European operations. Quote: Japanese carmaker Nissan has warned that a no-deal Brexit could make its European business model unsustainable. Nissan's European chairman, Gianluca de Ficchy, said if a 10% export tariff was introduced after the UK left the EU it would put its operations "in jeopardy". This would be case if the UK moved to World Trade Organization (WTO) rules after Brexit, he said. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-50000530 I suppose some Brexiteers may consider it a "win" because in addition to 7,000 jobs being lost in the UK, there would be 5,000 jobs lost in Spain as well.

10th October 2019, 09:45 AM	#1020
Garrison Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: UK Posts: 5,562	Originally Posted by Darat That government hasn't been in power for quite some time. It is an unusual viewpoint that the current parliament should have to keep to what a previous government promised. It should also be borne in mind that a number of those making the promises during the referendum are the government now...
	__________________ So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/ And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX

10th October 2019, 09:48 AM	#1021
Garrison Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: UK Posts: 5,562	Originally Posted by ceptimus Not when the incoming government (and the main opposition party for that matter) promised to honour the result of the referendum in their 2017 manifestos. So obviously now that those who made all those outlandish promises on behalf of the Leave campaign are the government you naturally expect them to deliver £350 million a week for the NHS and a trade deal as good or better than the one we have as members of the EU?
	__________________ So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/ And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX

10th October 2019, 10:04 AM	#1022
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 97,752	Originally Posted by ceptimus Not when the incoming government (and the main opposition party for that matter) promised to honour the result of the referendum in their 2017 manifestos. Then you need to be taking the likes of Smith, Mogg and Johnson to task for not keeping the manifesto promises they made when they repeatedly voted to keep the UK in the EU.
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

10th October 2019, 10:17 AM	#1023
ceptimus puzzler Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 6,460	Originally Posted by Darat Then you need to be taking the likes of Smith, Mogg and Johnson to task for not keeping the manifesto promises they made when they repeatedly voted to keep the UK in the EU. When did they do that?
ceptimus puzzler Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 6,460

10th October 2019, 10:23 AM	#1024
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 97,752	Originally Posted by ceptimus When did they do that? Your memory must be going, you've posted about them not voting to leave the EU only a few weeks ago!
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

10th October 2019, 11:06 AM	#1025
ceptimus puzzler Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 6,460	So when you say they voted to keep the UK in the EU, you actually meant they voted for the so-called, "Mrs May's EU withdrawal agreement." So the opposite of what you said. No wonder I didn't understand. As you know, I didn't think that was a good way to leave the EU. I'm glad it didn't pass and that we now have a chance to leave the EU in a more complete manner. Actually, I still don't fully understand what you're claiming - as far as I know, Mogg only voted for May's deal once. What did you mean by 'repeatedly'?
ceptimus puzzler Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 6,460	Last edited by ceptimus; 10th October 2019 at 11:09 AM.

10th October 2019, 12:49 PM	#1026
Darat Lackey Administrator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: South East, UK Posts: 97,752	Originally Posted by ceptimus So when you say they voted to keep the UK in the EU, you actually meant they voted for the so-called, "Mrs May's EU withdrawal agreement." So the opposite of what you said. No wonder I didn't understand. As you know, I didn't think that was a good way to leave the EU. I'm glad it didn't pass and that we now have a chance to leave the EU in a more complete manner. Actually, I still don't fully understand what you're claiming - as far as I know, Mogg only voted for May's deal once. What did you mean by 'repeatedly'? Opposite world must be a wonderful place.
	__________________ I wish I knew how to quit you

10th October 2019, 12:58 PM	#1027
Captain_Swoop Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 32,653	2016: “EU citizens will have the exact same rights as before” “Stop scaring EU citizens with Project Fear. Nothing will change!” 2019: “Deport the *******!”

10th October 2019, 01:47 PM	#1028
ceptimus puzzler Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 6,460	Originally Posted by Darat Opposite world must be a wonderful place. You're not making any sense. Perhaps that's your deliberate intention.
ceptimus puzzler Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 6,460

10th October 2019, 01:54 PM	#1029
Lothian should be banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside Posts: 16,218	Originally Posted by ceptimus So when you say they voted to keep the UK in the EU, you actually meant they voted for the so-called, "Mrs May's EU withdrawal agreement." As you know, I didn't think that was a good way to leave the EU. I'm glad it didn't pass. The referendum was to leave, May's deal was to leave. If you, Boris and other brexiteers can happily betray 17.4 million people you can not complain when others look to do the same.

10th October 2019, 02:06 PM	#1030
GlennB Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Usk, Wales Posts: 26,531	Originally Posted by ceptimus So when you say they voted to keep the UK in the EU, you actually meant they voted for the so-called, "Mrs May's EU withdrawal agreement." ... As you know, I didn't think that was a good way to leave the EU. I'm glad it didn't pass and that we now have a chance to leave the EU in a more complete manner. Did you vote for 'a manner' of leaving the EU? I didn't notice any mentioned on the ballot paper.
	__________________ "Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut

10th October 2019, 04:05 PM	#1031
ceptimus puzzler Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 6,460	Originally Posted by Lothian The referendum was to leave, May's deal was to leave. If you, Boris and other brexiteers can happily betray 17.4 million people you can not complain when others look to do the same. This is nonsense and you know it. At the time of the votes it was THE LAW that we would leave on Halloween either with or without a deal. Mogg and others mostly voted against May's deal because they thought no deal was a better way of leaving. Mogg changed to voting for the deal on the third occasion because, by then he feared that remainers were in the ascendancy and that the choice was between May's deal and no Brexit at all. He has since stated that he now regrets having voted for the deal. It's clear that Mogg and other ERG members, whether or not they voted for May's deal once, are all committed to leaving the EU. Only an idiot would argue otherwise. The remainers who voted against the deal - Grieve and his pals - did so because they were opposed to any form of Brexit. Grieve will likely still vote against any deal Boris brings back from next week's summit (if the EU offer one) He is a fanatical remainer and a clear liar and hypocrite for having the gall to stand as a Tory in the 2017 election where their manifesto clearly stated that no deal was a definite possibility.
ceptimus puzzler Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 6,460	Last edited by ceptimus; 10th October 2019 at 04:07 PM.

10th October 2019, 08:58 PM	#1032
SezMe post-pre-born Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 25,119	Originally Posted by McHrozni Economy was on the top of the reasons to vote Brexit.<snip> That may well be but that does not mean that it should have been so. The Remainers let the Leavers set the terms of the debate, much to their loss. I think ceptimus is right. I think there should have been three pillars to the debate: social welfare, economic welfare and environmental sustainability. Too bad the Leavers made the second one drown out the other two.

10th October 2019, 11:04 PM	#1033
Lothian should be banned Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Earth, specifically the crusty bit on the outside Posts: 16,218	Originally Posted by ceptimus This is nonsense and you know it. At the time of the votes it was THE LAW that we would leave on Halloween either with or without a deal. Mogg and others mostly voted against May's deal because they thought no deal was a better way of leaving. Mogg changed to voting for the deal on the third occasion because, by then he feared that remainers were in the ascendancy and that the choice was between May's deal and no Brexit at all. He has since stated that he now regrets having voted for the deal. It's clear that Mogg and other ERG members, whether or not they voted for May's deal once, are all committed to leaving the EU. Only an idiot would argue otherwise. The remainers who voted against the deal - Grieve and his pals - did so because they were opposed to any form of Brexit. Grieve will likely still vote against any deal Boris brings back from next week's summit (if the EU offer one) He is a fanatical remainer and a clear liar and hypocrite for having the gall to stand as a Tory in the 2017 election where their manifesto clearly stated that no deal was a definite possibility. You are missing the point. May's deal would have delivered the referendum promise to leave the EU. That leavers opposed it shows us that we can not assume that any particular leave deal has the popular support. We can not say that May's deal is what the public voted for. Similarly we can not say that a hard brexit is what people voted for. You have shown the referendum can not be relied upon. Thank you for that.

10th October 2019, 11:04 PM	#1034
McHrozni Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,919	Originally Posted by SezMe That may well be but that does not mean that it should have been so. The Remainers let the Leavers set the terms of the debate, much to their loss. I think ceptimus is right. I think there should have been three pillars to the debate: social welfare, economic welfare and environmental sustainability. Too bad the Leavers made the second one drown out the other two. Plus Brexit makes the other two worse by default. We're left with "soverignty", "standing independently" and other such meaningless phrases. McHrozni
	__________________ لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه

11th October 2019, 12:14 AM	#1035
Ulf Nereng Muse Join Date: Sep 2019 Location: Norway Posts: 597	Or "taking back control". I have often wondered which EU regulations are supposed to be so bad. Is it such a great idea to have lower standards than EU does? I've only been affected directly by an EU regulation once that I am aware of; when my city council was forced to improve the water supply because it didn't meet EU's minimum standards. It had become undrinkable at times, but now it is fine again. But I'm sure local UK authorites can save a lot of money when they are "back in control"...