[Closed] EU Referendum - are you in or out?

zippykona - Member

Don't fudge the issue can I buy my chocolate or not?

You can, as long as its not Derry Milk.

An unhappy Farage always makes my day and cheers me up no end.

My ideal state of affairs is for him to be apoplectic with rage, to the degree that his alcohol and nicotine compromised blood pressure is dangerously high.

You can, as long as its not Derry Milk.

*polite applause*

What about Green and Blacks, are they ok?

From my perspective discussions heading in totally the wrong direction.

The thought Jambalaya weeping into his rice crispies this morning has brightened the day no end. I had been holding onto THM's previous comment about a frothy Laura Kuenssberg.

Ouch - bit close, that pun

zippykona - Member

What about Green and Blacks, are they ok?

Perfectly.

Black and Tans, not so much.

teamhurtmore - Member

Ouch - bit close, that pun

😉

he just wants a response - preferably an upset/emotional one - so why do you bother to keep giving it to him? We all know what he is doing here so why feed?

THM is the representaive on here of

A profession - banking
A party - the tories
An education system - that fails on the most basic levels as he proves
Wealth - and the attitudes of those who have it

He is the incarnation of some very unattractive aspects of Britain (which I may go into later) and delights in demonstating that to the STW world. He is his online persona unlike some. You can't invent the reactions and tactics he uses. He is part of a system. The stereotype is the man. Along with others I point out his micky taking, sarcasm, misquoting, codescending, "nope" confirmation that you're right and he has no argument, accusations of lying, immorality... and he presses on regardless.

I do find it stange that the moderation team don't do anything. Repaeatedly calling people liars when they are clearly not is so obviously negative use of the forum and a personal attack that I'm surprised it's tolerated. His persoanl attacks on TJ have gone on for as long as he's been THM.

STW can be the best of Britain, perhaps why I'm here, there's moral support to be had, material support in some cases, entertainment, news of all types, lively exchanges. It's a cross section of society, but mainly the hard working contructive middle-middle doing their best for themselves and their communities. THM, Jamba and Mefty are here to remind us that all is not well in Britain because some are intent on ****ing the rest of the population over.

Anyhow, ignoring him all the time wouldn't give him the opportunity to show his true colours.

STW can be the best of Britain, perhaps why I'm here

Anyway, the thought of Mogg feeling that knife in his back and the sound of harsh (there’s a hint) Norn Irn accents saying “how about ye” scuttling back down the dark alley fills me with joy.

Wow - hope you feel better now Ed. You keep repeating these abusive and unfounded accusations, but they do not become true. (Even this latest outburst contains untrue comments). Other than confirming that you don’t like having your constant flow of innaccurate comments being pointed out. Reformed??

I'lL leave that for the mods to decide, THM.

Please do. That would save everyone from these extensive and unfounded abusive posts of other forum members

Hmm.

THM's biggest problem on these threads is the fact he doesn't quite follow up enough on what he's said. So it's quite hard for us to deal with his points. Even more important cos he's an economist and operates in a different area to most of us.

Ed's problem is that he's 100% convinced he's always right and knows everything - I'm not entirely sure he does. THM could refute him or engage constructively but he just calls him wrong but doesn't properly nail him to the floor.

Jam's problem is that he runs away from challenges to his position instead of acknowledging if they have merit.

TJ's problem is that he seems too willing to write people as arseholes rather than engage the debate.

My problem is that I don't invest enough time in the details of political issues so I can't argue properly on most of the finer points.

Have I covered everyone?

Even this latest outburst contains untrue comments

This is what I mean. What bits are untrue? Let's hear it.

My problem is that you are all idiots

Well I either provide a link or a figure everyone has already seen and commented on, Molgrips. 20bn as the original British offer and 57bn as what is commonly quoted as to what May has agreed to in this case.

A reply of "100% incorrect" with no justification is trolling.

Edukator - Reformed Troll

he just wants a response - preferably an upset/emotional one - so why do you bother to keep giving it to him? We all know what he is doing here so why feed?

THM is the representaive on here of

A profession - banking
A party - the tories
An education system - that fails on the most basic levels as he proves
Wealth - and the attitudes of those who have it

He is the incarnation of some very unattractive aspects of Britain (which I may go into later) and delights in demonstating that to the STW world. He is his online persona unlike some. You can't invent the reactions and tactics he uses. He is part of a system. The stereotype is the man. Along with others I point out his micky taking, sarcasm, misquoting, codescending, "nope" confirmation that you're right and he has no argument, accusations of lying, immorality... and he presses on regardless.

I do find it stange that the moderation team don't do anything. Repaeatedly calling people liars when they are clearly not is so obviously negative use of the forum and a personal attack that I'm surprised it's tolerated. His persoanl attacks on TJ have gone on for as long as he's been THM.

STW can be the best of Britain, perhaps why I'm here, there's moral support to be had, material support in some cases, entertainment, news of all types, lively exchanges. It's a cross section of society, but mainly the hard working contructive middle-middle doing their best for themselves and their communities. THM, Jamba and Mefty are here to remind us that all is not well in Britain because some are intent on **** the rest of the population over.

Edukator, your posts never come across as cruel (silly sometimes mind) and I don't believe you are trying to be cruel there but be careful that you're not aspiring to have an echo chamber. Diversity of opinion and viewpoint is essential in life. Give the man the amount of your time and attention you believe he's worth and carry on.

Anyway, caught TM saying there would be no hard border. How's that going to be implemented? Has anyone told Arlene yet?

Molgrips’ biggest problem is apparent reasonableness, receptiveness to others’ point of view and lack of an axe to grind.

My problem is that you are all idiots

Liking David Allen Green's comment that this is BEANO - Brexit Existing As Name Only. It certainly feels like we're in a comic strip sometimes.

My problem is that you are all idiots

Sorry came over all THM then for a second.

So been busy all morning. This is good news right. Brexit but everything staying the same and no need to vote in euro elections?

molgrips - Member

Hmm.

THM's biggest problem on these threads is the fact he doesn't quite follow up enough on what he's said. So it's quite hard for us to deal with his points. Even more important cos he's an economist and operates in a different area to most of us.

I hadn't realised this, interesting. Are you an economist THM? I was unaware.

I think the Ed vs THM thing centres on whether or not we or the EU have 'capitulated'. Basically, who's positions have moved the most?

For 'the bill', certainly- the answer to this depends on who said what in the beginning of all this. In the main, the more sensible bits of government held the line that we'd pay our contractual obligations "for the period" and no more. We're more or less doing that as part of this agreement. 'The period' is now of course longer than it was before with the transition period. Which is clearly fair enough.

The problem is that the rabids and inflammatories, like Johnson, were putting about the view that we'd pay some kind of imaginary minimum "Cry God for Harry!" amount of money, and that perception took hold in places. So I'd say that Ed has a point here as those cudgels were taken up in...certain places in the popular press.

It all comes down to this: who actually holds the official line for all of this? We have a strange situation where many directly unconnected individuals are acting as mouthpieces and given credence.

Anyway-

Go and check what the EU wanted, what we proposed, andwere we ended up.

I thought the EU got everything they wanted?
What didn't they get?

Yes by training. Work only partially. Very involved with implications of brexit.

I don’t think anyone has capitulated tbc. I have always argued that we are in negotiations and that both sides will compromise in the end. The grown ups want to avoid a lose:lose and the real work goes on behind the BS that the media is fed.

Despite my scepticism of both parties generally I am genuinely impressed by the way that have delivered compromises on the bill and the border. They needed to do this because the real issue that drives everything else is the nature of the trade agreement. From that we can sort out the rest.

Time to resurrect the Brexit jukebox.

My 50p gets “Come on Arlene” by Derry’s Midnight Runners.

Possibly followed by the massed ranks of the Tory party with “I would do anything for May (but I won’t do that)”

From FT, some interesting stuff:

The main reason why Theresa May’s agreement with EU negotiators was scuppered on Monday was that she had left the constituencies she depends on insufficiently prepared for what was coming. A consensus, in turn, will be hard to achieve until all sides are in possession of the facts about what is actually possible to achieve in the global economy. The trade-offs between the various goals of those who want the UK to leave the EU will not be confronted until everyone admits they are there.
So as the deadline to make an agreement before this month’s European Council meeting draws near, here are some of the key facts.
First, some people in the UK still suggest Britain could simply decline to erect an economic border with the Republic of Ireland (and, some hope, the rest of the EU by precedent) even if it “takes back control” by leaving the EU customs and regulatory regimes. The notion is to “dare” the EU side to set up a border which at best (so the argument goes) it will not do, and at a minimum allows the UK to blame “the Europeans”.
This is ignorant. My colleague Alan Beattie has set out why: as a member of the World Trade Organization the UK is legally obliged to treat the EU no better than all other WTO members — which entails imposing tariffs — in the absence of a free-trade agreement. And even with an FTA, it still has international legal obligations to enforce various other regulatory rules on the border. The “just don’t erect a border” fantasy presupposes the UK as a rogue global citizen.
Second, too many UK politicians still don’t seem to know what function an economic border has. So let’s break it down. When goods cross an international border, three things have to be enforced. First, the collection of any import duties or compliance with import quotas. Second, compliance with rules of origin, which involve preventing third-country goods from being camouflaged as the trading partners’ own production (when the latter are treated more leniently). Third, the enforcement of standards, such as food regulations, which must be met for the products to be legal in the territory they enter.
An FTA takes care of the first by removing tariffs between the trading partners. A customs union takes care of the second by agreeing on the same tariffs against third-party countries (so that no rules of origin need to be checked once the goods are inside the customs union). A regulatory union takes care of the third: when the rules are the same in both countries, compliance checks when goods cross a border are unnecessary.
The UK policy at the moment is to negotiate an FTA but leave both the EU customs union and the regulatory union known as the single market. But you can eliminate the need for an economic border, with checks, only if you have all three. And that presupposes a visa- and passport-free travel area, without which the people crossing the border would need to be checked as well.
Third, this means it is an error to think the Norway-Sweden border or the Switzerland-EU allows frictionless trade. Norway is in a free-trade agreement and a regulatory union with the EU (through the European Economic Area, which is both). But it is not in the customs union, so rules of origin compliance must be checked. And for this a physical border infrastructure is necessary. Switzerland is not in the EEA but in effect harmonises its regulations with the EU’s and is therefore in a comparable situation. (Norway and Switzerland are in the Schengen area of passport-free travel.)
The Swiss and the Norwegian borders are as managed as efficiently as can be, but efficient (given the need for checks) is not the same as frictionless (which means no checks). Chris Giles’s latest column charmingly describes his personal experience of economic activity across the Swiss-French border, and illustrates the economic costs even these most efficient border controls impose — as seen, for example, in the wide spread between car rental prices in the Swiss and French sections of Geneva airport.
None of this is frictionless, let alone free of physical border infrastructure, which the UK has promised it wants to avoid along the Irish border.
Fourth, for good measure, let us add that promising customs and regulatory harmonisation in only some sectors won’t do: border checks would then be necessary to determine if the transported goods fell under the covered sector or not. That’s why if the UK will allow Northern Ireland some regulatory and customs alignment with the EU, it may as well permit it align across the board.
These are simply facts about the world. As Kevin O’Rourke points out, they are borne out by UK-Irish history. It was not until the EU established the single market, a much-maligned set of harmonised regulations and a common court to enforce them, that border posts became unnecessary between the two states on the island of Ireland.
Understanding these facts and knowing this history makes one thing clear: there is a logical contradiction at the heart of UK policy. One can only “take back control” in the sense the UK government defines it by having controls the UK government still insists it has forsworn.

So NI citizens, get to keep their EU citizenship & the rest of us don't?

Im not sure that's fair !

kimbers - Member

So NI citizens, get to keep their EU citizenship & the rest of us don't?

Im not sure that's fair !

Well wouldn't they all technically have dual nationality as Irish/British anyway...so nothing changes.

From my perspective discussions heading in totally the wrong direction.

The most positive thing I’ve seen on this thread in a very long time.

Ok.

A cover version now Arlene and the cast of the DUP covering the cast of Grange Hill’s “Just say...”

Well wouldn't they all technically have dual nationality as Irish/British anyway...so nothing changes.

What's changed is they will no longer be citizens of an EU nation. Like the rest of us.

[i]Asked to name a concession EU has made, Barnier says he is not "at this stage insisting the UK should repay the removal costs" for EU agencies[/i]

feel the burn...

Seems to me any meaningful Brexit has been cancelled today.

mattjg - Member

Well wouldn't they all technically have dual nationality as Irish/British anyway...so nothing changes.

What's changed is they will no longer be citizens of an EU nation. Like the rest of us.

Yes but they're still technically Irish citizens if they wish to say so.

From the header page of the joint report

"......Under the caveat that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed"

So actually me and my German wife can take absolutely no heart from all the fine words in the 15 page document. Great if it comes off as written, but still no concrete guarantees of absolutely anything.

Meaning DUP supporters have left the EU and SF types haven’t I guess.

There are plenty of nationalist non-SF types.

It’s ok, I understand that for many on the “mainland” and on this thread, these last few weeks have been a sharp learning curve.

"......Under the caveat that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed"

So actually me and my German wife can take absolutely no heart from all the fine words in the 15 page document. Great if it comes off as written, but still no concrete guarantees of absolutely anything.

It does say that, but it also says:

"[b]In the absence of agreed solutions,[/b] the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Marketand the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement"

Statement 1 - Nothing in this document is agreed until everything is agreed.
Statement 2 - If nothing is agreed we will do this.

??

It’s ok, I understand that for many on the “mainland” and on this thread, these last few weeks have been a sharp learning curve.

Tbh ever since May DUP bribe, it's been quite illuminating !

I think statement 2 trumps statement 1.

I don't think the EU is bothered, the document is more political than legal. They have us where they wanted us and the asset grab can continue in an orderly fashion.

(I keep saying 'us' ... I'm not an us).

A cover version now Arlene and the cast of the DUP covering the cast of Grange Hill’s “Just say...”

Just say NEVER, NEVER, NEVER..

IGM - a couple of Brexit jukebox suggestions..........With or Without You by U2; My Way.

TBF this softest of Brexits is quite representative of the actual vote as it was so tight

It really is the Will of The People!

It really is the Will of The People!

don't be daft, people lost their opinions should never ever count.

some proper swivel-eyed brexies getting very upset on twitter

obviously its all the fault of EU/remoaners.... but when they see Mogg, IDS, Gove, Johnson etc going along with this I think they are starting to realise that they were conned

but not by Rremain !

So if we get to keep the status quo for several years after 2019 - this could allow me and my family enough time to escape to an EU country - we're not in a position to do it now.

Apparently Germany is giving out residency after only 6 months...?

The bit i've not got my head round is how is the fall back position in the document compatible with the stuff from Barnier about looking at a free trade agreement along the lines of Canada? Surely if we don't have freedom of movement + customs union (as we don't with Canada) then we have a border and it doesn't work?

So if we get to keep the status quo for several years after 2019

The way i read it is that it's from the withdrawal date, but now i've just chekced it's not specified in the document that the withdrawal date is the date of leaving the EU (march 2019) it could be the withdrawal agreement date, which might be two years later. But even if it's the first, the rights seem to apply if you're in the country you want to be in on the day of exit. So you've got a year.

Impressed with the wording, as regards all three key points. Very impressed.

Next step will be interesting … as a damage limitation new relationship is sought … and looks nothing like the relationship many (most?) Leave voters voted for. It will win over lots of border line Remain voters though, if it takes a sensible form that is in any way closer than the "fallback" positions outlined this morning.

Some epic comments on the DE website thismorning...

parliament are tyrannous, the enemy of the UK

Quote presumably from a leaver who voted for Parliamentary sovereignty 😆 😆

Kelvin we are becoming aligned in our thinking albeit from different internediatepoints!!

As I Said Yesterday, Brexit is dead in all but name.

Unfortunately, none of this solves the civil war in the political parties, especially the one plotting our course through all this. Feel real sympathy for May to be honest, when the opportunities arise for the B@5T@RD5 to knife her for not living by pure eurosceptic ideals, they will. Sensible cross bench cooperation will be essential next year.

And, "the people" should still be allowed to reject the final deal and ask to remain, once they can see the deal. If the deal is one that more people prefer than don't… then happy days… leave with the deal and work alongside our neighbours.

Surely this Irish border will also restrict are ability to do any trade deals with counties outside the EU if a final EU deal allows it?

Being a member of the EU will always be the best position we can be in whilst there must be no border in Ireland?

In so many sectors, UK and Europe will compromise on carrying on with current rules that it will change very little.

jambalaya - Member - Block User
I’ll retire to Europe somewhere in all likelihood, most probably France as my wife is French although she’s quite keen on Portugal at the moment (we have a few friends who have retired to Lisbon)
I have a UK passport and am confident I’ll need no citizenship test or new passport to move to Europe post April 2019

I'm still wondering why someone would so vociferously harp on about Brexit, then retire to a country still in the EU?

interesting times. Let's see what happens next.

Well, in it's current form there's a safety net of access to markets and for the flow of labour, but the onus is on the Brexiteers to come up with better deals that suit both the EU and UK. This could also mean that the preferred low tax, low regulation, tax haven that the extreme Brexiteers wanted is off the table.

Of course, if May is toppled and a hardliner takes control then they have to renege on deals, thus damaging any goodwill gained to date and the nation's reputation and trading position. They may also find themselves short of support in parliament.

With a 52/48 split, the Brexiteers had to act quickly. Cornered, they will be bellicose (I've already seen the shrill commentary from the Express). I fully expect the faux 'patriotism' card being played ad nauseum.

This could also mean that the preferred low tax, low regulation, tax haven that the extreme Brexiteers wanted is off the table.

Any hint of deal that gives Britain unfair advantage and millions of Europeans will be writing letters that start:

Monsieur le Président,

Je vous fais une lettre au sujet du Brexit et le droit de véto dont vous disposez... .

The logical progression is:

Hard brexit the way the hard-brexiters want it doesn't address any of the issues leading to the leave vote and causes a multitude of new, extremely serious problems -> Soft brexit is the the only workable way of leaving the EU (where we are now) -> but wait, this is worse than what we had before... All the disadvantages and less control over what happens -> no brexit is the only way to not make things worse for ourselves.

And everyone who already figured that one out, say, before the vote, slow claps.

@Edukator

I'm ashamed to admit that I had to google-translate that. 😳

But I'm 100% in support of the EU taking punitive action against the UK in event of a minority of politicians forcing us down the route of being a tax haven.

And everyone who already figured that one out, say, before the vote, slow claps.

Time to embrace people slowly coming to the same conclusion, not alienate them.

This time next year they may be an overwhelming majority of "the people" wanting to cancel Brexit, rather than except the replacement weaker single actual realised deal/relationship. At that point, should they be told their "will" was frozen in 2016?

Hard brexit the way the hard-brexiters want it doesn't address any of the issues leading to the leave vote and causes a multitude of new, extremely serious problems

Thusly.

So £40bn - that's just the cash but works out at £2297.43 each.

Cough up Brexiteers.

And everyone who already figured that one out, say, before the vote, slow claps.

clap

clap

clap.

So £40bn - that's just the cash but works out at £2297.43 each.

*quick back of envelope calculation*

Yup, if the 17m Leave voters gave up their tax free personal allowance for the 2017-18 tax year, then we'd have as near as dammit the £40bn divorce bill.

This would be acceptable to me.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-europe-42270239

Ah, the lovely EU getting ready to sue sovereign nations like Poland, Hungary etc for daring to set their own migrant limits....bunch of tits, this is why half the country hates the EU.

deviant - Member
Ah, the lovely EU getting ready to sue sovereign nations like Poland, Hungary etc for daring to set their own migrant limits....bunch of tits, this is why half the country hates the EU.

if they dont like it they can always quit and get a really great deal like Britain has just . . . oh wait......

thankfully half the population is not as racially motivated /focused as you are

[quote=deviant > https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-europe-42270239
Ah, the lovely EU getting ready to sue sovereign nations like Poland, Hungary etc for daring to set their own migrant limits....bunch of tits, this is why half the country hates the EU.

it's very alarming that someone with your extreme views is employed in a role where peoples lives can depend on you. I refuse to believe you don't take your hate filled world view into account if you're called out to someone you don't like.

it's very alarming that someone with your extreme views is employed in a role where peoples lives can depend on you.

Wow just wow !! Talk about hysterical reaction. If you think deviants views "extreme" you need to get out more!!

Does this mean we can go back to arguing about handlebar widths?

Brexit but everything staying the same and no need to vote in euro elections?

that's the spirit!
freed from the tyranny of voting in elections no-one gave a to55 about by jingo!

if this is the best result i'll take it.... but i still want remain.

If you think deviants views "extreme" you need to get out more!!

Whether they are extreme or just light racism is to somewhat miss the point , though its often interesting to see who defends them on these threads

[quote=taxi25 ]it's very alarming that someone with your extreme views is employed in a role where peoples lives can depend on you.
Wow just wow !! Talk about hysterical reaction. If you think deviants views "extreme" you need to get out more!!

there's a common theme with Deviant

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/eu-referendum-are-you-in-or-out/page/1091#post-8880873

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/eu-referendum-are-you-in-or-out/page/1091#post-8881008

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/eu-referendum-are-you-in-or-out/page/1090#post-8880345

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/eu-referendum-are-you-in-or-out/page/1090#post-8880388

deviant - Member
this is why half the country hates the EU.

Its only 37%, considerably less than half.

And its arguable whether all of them "hate" it.

But anyway.

And now...

“If the kippers are united” by Sham 52

Ah, the lovely EU getting ready to sue sovereign nations like Poland, Hungary etc for daring to set their own migrant limits.

Refugees, mate. There's a difference.

Plus, they signed up to the rules, then broke them. WTF should the EU have done? After all they're only trying to help the desperate. How awful of them.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/nov/04/un-attacks-australias-inhumane-refugee-processing-system

dannyh - Member
dannyh - Member
@dannyh one of the advatages of a WTO Brexit (or “no deal” if you prefer) is that it is a clean break.
@Jamby.
A clean break isn't always a good thing. Just saying it sounds like a line from Eastenders.

What is it you think we need a clean break from?

What regulations would you like to see us unburdened from and to what aim?

What do you think it is about the EU that actually holds us back, how is Brexit going to solve these issues and do you think that even if we do become more prosperous after Brexit (which I think 95% of people think is impossible), that the extra prosperity will benefit a majority or just a minority?

POSTED 10 HOURS AGO #

Sorry, Jamby, if you have already replied to this one. I have skimmed the last few pages looking for an answer and can't see one.

Ninfan put a reply up which seemed to be along the lines of really only wanting to deal with countries that used to be part of the empire and have English as their first language, but I haven't seen anything from you.

I struggle to see how deregulation ever achieves anything but lining the pockets of the few at the expense of the many, chiefly because the existing regulation is generally more protective than restrictive (although the fascist press always try chipping away at 'elf un safety').

It is this narrative of being freed up from something that worries me as it is a Trojan horse for cowboy capitalism in my view. The sort of capitalism that is beautifully illustrated by the likes of Cecil Rhodes, whose sheer bravado, bluff, bullying and courting of power allowed massive exploitation.

POSTED 5 HOURS AGO #

I'm still trying to get an answer from Jamby on this. What is it you want to be deregulated from and what do you want to do with this new found 'freedom'?

Maybe one of the other Brexies will provide a stop-gap answer?

Ninfan wants to deal with the old outposts of empire (although I note that they are ones where the typical skin colour is quite light), might be a coincidence, but India and Nigeria didn't appear on his list.

Anyone else?

I haven't followed much today as it is my 40th birthday (happy birthday to me), but I have noted that that utter shitstain Farage doesn't seem happy. This is an easy litmus for me, so I can carry on enjoying my birthday!