it's ultimately a point of political agreement.
I don't disagree with that, if all parties to the treaty agree an amendment that would certainly be case and is much misunderstood, there is always a political solution. Sadly I don't think the EU have to date shown the willingness to look for one, we certainly have.
ooooh don’t mention Gibraltar they’re hoping that one slips by without anyone noticing.
It’s not like Spain can veto our deal errrrrr...
Greece may also want a few marble things we bought at a boot sale back as well.
I’m not sure about how realistic vetoing of our deal is but we all know what happens when you let people vote on stuff.
One of the leavers who I do read regularly is Roger Bootle albeit in the Torygraph.
My parents recommended his "the problem with Europe" book before the ref, so I foolishly read it on holiday before I realised he wrote for the torygraph. It nearly ended up in the sea on several occasions, such as when he said it was Europe's fault that doctors couldn't work longer hours. It seemed ridiculous, but given "bonfire of worker's rights" seems to be the way we're headed, it's obviously a common viewpoint.
mefty - Member
it's ultimately a point of political agreement.
I don't disagree with that, if all parties to the treaty agree an amendment that would certainly be case and is much misunderstood, there is always a political solution. Sadly I don't think the EU have to date shown the willingness to look for one, we certainly have.
for cancelling A50? Tusk has spelled that out quite clearly.
Tusk has spelled that out quite clearly.
He has said it rather than spelled it out, but on what basis can he deliver it?
the uk government would need to ask that.
an expensive business this putting up borders lark.
..he said it was Europe's fault that doctors couldn't work longer hours
Well that's sort of accurate. Pesky European Working Time Directive insisting that your doctor has had at least [i]some[/i] sleep in the last 36 hours.
But [i]most[/i] people would consider that a positive thing.
woman at 10.13 is getting straight to the point!
Well the UK government has no intention to do that, but the question remains.
The UK government is quite clearly looking for a political solution to Brexit. To date the EU has approached it technocratically when THM talks about about the "grown ups" he is talking about a political solution. There is an assumption that this is a zero sum game i.e. to the extent that the UK loses the EU gains, that is a false assumption, all parties will lose and the net gainers will be elsewhere and everyone in Europe (not the EU) will be worse off.
There is an assumption that this is a zero sum game i.e. to the extent that the UK loses the EU gains, that is a false assumption
Who on earth is making that assumption?
Everyone sensible says both the UK and the EU will lose out (although some individual EU countries might benefit and indeed may push a line where the EU does worse overall for their personal gain).
The thing is the smart money is on the UK losing out a lot more.
I understand exactly what thm's position is perfectly fine. I still disagree that a shit deal or no deal are the only options as davis seems intent on today, they are the only options through choice.
Grown ups as far as I like to think, consider all options.
He is not a turn the cheek sort of a guy or a do unto others sort of a person.
It is rather cute. I am curious about why the name of the committee resulted in such a sneering comment with regards to "practical Conservatives" but sadly I doubt I will be enlightened.
Who on earth is making that assumption?
Well I think Edukator assumes that financial services will decamp to Europe.
Especially and ironically in financial services
Well I think Edukator assumes that financial services will decamp to Europe.
I cant quite see the connection between your sweeping statement about assumptions and that.
Although of course financial services is one of those cases where individual EU countries will be fancying their chances are stepping up a level. Regardless of whether that damages the EU more than giving the UK lots of loopholes to stay in position.
How, what, why ........ 😯
I understand exactly what thm's position is perfectly fine. I still disagree that a shit deal or no deal are the only options as davis seems intent on today, they are the only options through choice.
They are the only existent options until there is change.
I think we're done with this pantomime, agree to disagree? 😆
Let’s not forget those who argue that planning for alternative solutions is a waste of time. Quite forceful on the issue 😉
btw they are basically saying if you want an invisible border, you need to load that border up with spooks! 😆 that'll work!
teamhurtmore - Member
Let’s not forget those who argue that planning for alternative solutions is a waste of time. Quite forceful on the issue
Well we're in agreement there, you can never be sure what the loonballs in power will do. I think this gov will collapse within a year or so, making a mockery of the whole thing. but aye, if you've vested interests you should be planning all options. stay, shit deal, no deal.
mefty - MemberThey are the only existent options until there is change.
change or a bit of reality dawns on the tories.
teamhurtmore - Member
Let’s not forget those who argue that planning for alternative solutions is a waste of time
Again an out of context and misquoted special...
Nobody says don't plan, plenty of people are but also campaigning to stop the madness.
Also picking up on an earlier point where you accused me of bullying I suggest 2 options (non exclusive) first press the report button if the sarcasm is too much for you. Second answer the question.
I think we're done with this pantomime, agree to disagree?
I never have a problem with doing that, so yes. What does irk me, and I am not accusing you of this, is when I have argued a point and then they pop up a few pages later saying no one has addressed the point.
Maybe you’re not very good at arguing your point Mefty.
A possibility nothing more. 😉
well we'd need to discuss specific examples but there's a long history of going round in circles and people deliberately forgetting what happened 4 or 5 pages ago.
Maybe we are ALL too busy arguing to notice there is a point to any of this 😉
most likely! 😆
I think the problem may be that our chief negotiator is an ex Tate & Lyle guy with a chip on his shoulder about the EU and no apparent negotiation skill.
Repeatedly saying you want to be flexible and innovate while shown no apparent flexibility and a lack of realistic innovation ain’t good enough.
May should have called for a government of national unity when she first took office and got some decent brains from all over the political spectrum.
She didn’t and the rest is history.
I never have a problem with doing that, so yes. What does irk me, and I am not accusing you of this, is when I have argued a point and then they pop up a few pages later saying no one has addressed the point
Mefty you are assuming that the posse bother to read posts. You are now a closet leaver and a marked man. 😉
I doubt Ed would be keen on financial services locating to Europe. Did you forget the list of their evil ways?
IGM labour would never have signed up,to that. They are revelling in the Tory misfortune. The irony will be when they are the ones delivering Brexshit. Lady Nugget in full Britannia kit.. It's almost worth the nightmare just to see that alone
Shame for Stramer to be associated with that lot though
Mefty you are assuming that the posse bother to read posts. You are now a closet leaver and a marked man.
I think the questions about the posts (that go unanswered) should tell you that people are reading them. People just disagree with your thinking on the issues and choose to voice that.
Maybe you’re not very good at arguing your point Mefty.
A possibility, perhaps I should be more insulting.
well we'd need to discuss specific examples but there's a long history of going round in circles and people deliberately forgetting what happened 4 or 5 pages ago.
Not really, ignoring them is far easier. A bit of self control obviates the need for an extension.
I doubt Ed would be keen on financial services locating to Europe. Did you forget the list of their evil ways?
One of his many great paradoxes.
you said it, no me. 😉Not really, ignoring them is far easier
One of the "departed" greatly enjoyed your Closeau post 😉
I doubt Ed would be keen on financial services locating to Europe. Did you forget the list of their evil ways?
One of his many great paradoxes.
Playing the man again? How does that impact the UK tax take, the UK as a centre for financial services and a default location for companies setting up an office. It weakens the UK considerably.
Not really, ignoring them is far easier.
So you are complaining about being ignored whilst ignoring those who respond to you?
he UK government is quite clearly looking for a political solution to Brexit
They are looking for a solution that is legally impossible and are not negotiating seriously at all
mefty - MemberWell I think Edukator assumes that financial services will decamp to Europe.
Alredy happening on a significant scale, due to accelerate hugely if nothing from the UK side in terms of accepting reality / negotiating seriously in the next couple of weeks.
come on Mefty - you are not daft - why do you keep saying stuff that is clearly untrue?
Playing the man again?
Not really, he has been excoriating on the venality of them and then been gleeful at how they will be simply transfer their servers. That is a paradox.
Alredy happening on a significant scale - why do you keep saying stuff that is clearly untrue.
😀 And on that bombshell 😀
Sergio Ermotti, the bank’s chief executive, said on Friday that it was becoming “more and more unlikely” that UBS would have to move as many people as it initially thought
mefty - MemberWhat does irk me, and I am not accusing you of this, is when I have argued a point and then they pop up a few pages later saying no one has addressed the point.
~that could be me. I tend to pop in and out of this thread so don't see every post. If it is me than apologies
Don't apologise for popping in and out - I just popped in having been away pretty much since claiming page 1000, and whilst I'm tempted to make a point it's clear it's mainly just bickering here now.
THM - if she really had declared for national unity it might have been difficult for labour to say no - though I agree it would probably have been bad for them long term.
Mefty - in terms of making your argument (well or badly) I think you sometimes (and please take this as constructive criticism, I don’t mean it to be derogatory, although I see there is a risk) come across as a bit of a smart alec, a barrack room lawyer as my father would have said. That said your google skills are better than mine.
