Bit of Brexit info required. | Page 2 | Vital Football

Bit of Brexit info required.

paz1967

Vital Football Hero
#21
"cake and eat it!

Nothing has changed from that pompous arrogant scribble, in fact deluded too.

All those thinking that the EU will be too concerned over losing trade with UK despite it now being a strong importer is just short-sighted on many counts;

ideas suggesting British workers are stuck with EU migrants working for low wages is folly when the reason Uk has a minimum wage is because of EU pressure the first place, along actually with perhaps every progressive 'human rights' rules that have b3coem part of our daily lives., from workers rights to pollution. (uk already failing badly)

Also thinking that UK can compete with the EU block when it comes to opening new trade deals with other growing economies wrong. EU is still a huge amount bigger than the Uk economy obviously and that holds sway in dealing with other countries who will have a choice of dealing with the EU OR dealing with Uk because that will be the EU stance. The other side of the coin is terrible, I mean really can you imagine a trade agreement with the USA between the food and health industries? And even politically, when you can have a Trump or a Clinton or a tea-party directive based on the latest rend on Twitter that week? On that health side, the NHS is underfunded, perhaps deliberately, well, of course by choice. But a NO DEAL would mean huge price increases in the health industry from day one. It could easily be the last nail in its coffin under its current state and maybe enough reason for it go private big time. Food for thought.

I think some Brexit voters have a low opinion of other countries or a very inflated opinion of their own worth. There is not and never has been a way that UK can be equal or better off and have any trade advantage to the EU than it currently has. Thats just a given. Its like Notts county leaving Nottingham and taking the city ground to play in. Finances are irrelevant at that level.

Im not a doom monger type, as I say I don't know why it bothers me really, cos it doesn't affect me, it is probably a good thing for me. Spain will get more businesses here. Simple as that. We have the cheap infrastructure and a great climate and a deal to sell to about 26 countries without even charging vat if they have a vat id. UK might become a bit Trumpy, focus on big business, energy companies, pharmaceuticals.. Oh they do that already right? And out of EU they can do much more of that. So maybe from a GDP perspective, it could be 'ok'. But not for the masses, there will be more hurdles, more red tape and less money. There's not a single argument that makes things equal to now never mind better
 

Lienking

Vital 1st Team Regular
#22
Paz, I don't expect cake and eat it, but I do expect to live in a country that can make its own rules. We joined the Common Market, and things should have stayed at that. Trade deals are deals. A large country may buy more, but why would you sign a deal with a country that could swamp your own. You're not forced to sign a deal !There are over 200 countries in the world, 85% of which exist outside the EU. The problem is that we are not attached to the EU by apron strings, we are in their handcuffs. Leaving will be a shock, but we can then trade with Australia, Canada, Africa, China, India, US etc.
British manufacturing has been decimated during our EU years. Ironically even Corbyn won't be allowed to subsidise our industries as he wants, if we stay in the EU or end up with May's deal.

Even your statement that the climate in Spain is better than here is only your opinion. Many people (me included) don't like the heat. I live in the UK, because I like it here!
 

in_the_top_one

Vital Football Hero
#24
Paz, I don't expect cake and eat it, but I do expect to live in a country that can make its own rules. We joined the Common Market, and things should have stayed at that. Trade deals are deals. A large country may buy more, but why would you sign a deal with a country that could swamp your own. You're not forced to sign a deal !There are over 200 countries in the world, 85% of which exist outside the EU. The problem is that we are not attached to the EU by apron strings, we are in their handcuffs. Leaving will be a shock, but we can then trade with Australia, Canada, Africa, China, India, US etc.
British manufacturing has been decimated during our EU years. Ironically even Corbyn won't be allowed to subsidise our industries as he wants, if we stay in the EU or end up with May's deal.

Even your statement that the climate in Spain is better than here is only your opinion. Many people (me included) don't like the heat. I live in the UK, because I like it here!
Not this again.
We never lost sovereignty. We pooled some aspects for the measurable benefit of all involved. That is what happens when deals are made, and what will also happen when we strike 'bold new trade deals' with powerhouses such as Honduras, DR Congo and New Zealand.

"A large country may buy more, but why would you sign a deal with a country that could swamp your own."
What on earth do you mean? No deals with countries that have large populations? Please elaborate on this.

We are not in the EUs handcuffs, we ARE the EU. We write the rules and nobody around the table of 28 is more influential than us. Right now, we rule Europe in a way the British empire fantasists could only dream of. I suppose when the British were building railways across Africa and the subcontinent we were net contributors and some were probably saying we should stop spending money overseas and build railways in our own country instead..


We already trade with all the places you list and we have very good arrangements with most because deals have been negotiated as the most powerful bloc on earth. Ever wondered why Trump considers the EU "a foe" when it comes to trade? It's because he cannot bully the EU and has to settle for a deal that is fair to both parties.
You still haven't told me how negotiating on our own can possibly lead to better deals than negotiating with a market ten times the size. Maybe other countries would give a better deal with little old UK in isolation so we dont "swamp" them??
 

Lienking

Vital 1st Team Regular
#26
If we write the EU rules and we are the EU, I vote we stay in, stop free movement, make all our courts superior to the EU, sack Juncker, Tusk,Selmayr etc. In fact, I'm surprised we haven't done this already.

As regards deals with large countries, I didn't say anything about not doing deals. The EU has a 10% tariff on US vehicles to stop them swamping the EU market. The US has a 2.5% tax on EU cars, but the EU moans when Trump raises the tax! We don't want the US to take over our NHS, so we would have special rules. You do a deal that suits the UK and the US. If you don't like it you don't sign. At the moment all deals have to suit 28 countries on our side.

It's debatable that large entities get better deals. You only have to look at the NHS to see they pay more for things than small companies . We do trade with non-EU countries, but only on EU rules and with EU tariffs. I believe we pay around £15 billion in tariffs for goods from outside the EU and the money goes to the EU. If France want a tariff to protect grapes, wine and their agriculture their will be a tariff. I can remember one time when the EU was spending millions on trying to get people to stop smoking, and at the same time spending millions subsidising Greek tobacco growers.

The US is more likely to sign a deal for example with a country that only exports a million cars and pays decent wages than they are with a large country that pays workers little and could manufacture millions of units. In fact I believe Switzerland has a better deal with China than the EU does.
 

in_the_top_one

Vital Football Hero
#27
They're perfectly easy to sack but unfortunately for you they have been elected. Damn democracy.
Except salmayr. He was appointed by those that were elected, much like our own dear civil service, including Olly Robins.

And what exactly have these villains done wrong that they deserve to lose their jobs? At which point did they not stand for the eu with a clear and consistent message?

Do you expect uk courts to preside over our future trade disputes with eu or other nations? Don't you think that would be somewhat unacceptable to our new trading partners? All the ecj does is uphold rules that we have already signed up to and, in most cases, written.
 

Lienking

Vital 1st Team Regular
#28
ITTO I respect your opinion, and as I have stated it is only opinion as to what I think might happen. However you put " We are not in the EUs handcuffs, we ARE the EU. We write the rules and nobody around the table of 28 is more influential than us. Right now, we rule Europe in a way the British empire fantasists could only dream of." It is clear that those facts are wrong. We had a significant influence on the EU, but certainly no more than Germany and France. Freedom of movement was great, but has gone disastrously wrong since the 2004 EU expansion. If we ruled the EU we would simply have scrapped it, and probably carried on as before.
 

in_the_top_one

Vital Football Hero
#29
I'd say France, Germany and us were on a par although these things are hard to gauge. Z Considering the legal structure and everything else you could say we were more influential but obviously we aren't in the Eurozone.

I'm happy to see you acknowledge that freedom of movement has been great. I think it still is, on balance. It clearly doesn't always seem that way to everybody because the costs and benefits do not match spatially and the distribution of foreign people had changed the composition of some towns and the benefits have not been allocated proportionally. Labour had a plan for this but the tories scrapped it - huge mistake. (Cue Toms claiming I have JC pyjamas..)

Of course EU FoM was only half of net immigration even at the time of the ref - which was a rare peak - and BoJo / Gove / Farage / Mail / Express / etc were scaremongering (read: lying) about Turkey. Even Gove has admitted feeling uncomfortable about that particular lie but it's a bit late for contrition now, Michael, isn't it?
 
Last edited:

Old Red Fart

Vital Football Hero
#33
Thought you might have regretted starting this and given up by now!
Not at all LK, I thought I knew the basics but apparently got that only partly right and have already learned enough to further my interest. Over here we don't get enough detail to be a real help.

As a proper old fogie myself you can probably read my mind !
 

in_the_top_one

Vital Football Hero
#34
Vote Leave refered to the police for cheating.
The Venice commission's Code on referenda states "In the event of a failure to abide by the statutory requirements, for instance if the cap on spending is exceeded by a significant margin, the vote must be annulled."

Apparently the UK has signed up to it but following it's rules is voluntary...
 

toms

Vital Football Hero
#35
The Venice commission's Code on referenda states "In the event of a failure to abide by the statutory requirements, for instance if the cap on spending is exceeded by a significant margin, the vote must be annulled."

Apparently the UK has signed up to it but following it's rules is voluntary...
Sure 17.4m people voted to leave on the basis of a £500000 overspend-they broke the rules and they should be punished for it if proven true but annulling the vote ....no no no

Where were Vince and Tim last night?
 

in_the_top_one

Vital Football Hero
#36
Sure 17.4m people voted to leave on the basis of a £500000 overspend-they broke the rules and they should be punished for it if proven true but annulling the vote ....no no no

Where were Vince and Tim last night?
It doesn't have to be that many though, does it?

They are in trouble for spending £675,315 on a single donation. That is near as dammit ten percent of their entire budget. If you don't think they were spending it on something they considered to be worthwhile then you are complicit in the post-truth, fake news era.

And what of the roles of the liars in chief? Johnson, Gove, Cummings, Patel, Fox, Grayling, Stewart, Field, Lawson and new-boy Raab? These people were on the Vote Leave committee and must have known about the single biggest payment that the organisation made during the campaign. And they knew it was illegal.

It is disgusting. Rules are there for a reason. In some ways, it doesn't even matter whether it swayed enough voters to tip the balance or not. Democracy has been undermined by a referendum that is now known to have been based on lies and not 'free and fair'. I'm saddened that you don't think this is an issue, Toms. Your principal basis for voting leave was for parliamentary sovereignty and democracy. Despite both being horrifically undermined before and since the referendum, you continue to argue the toss.

You make a good point about Vince and Tim. With them, the government would have won by a single vote. Strong and Stable indeed. Parliament probably cannot sort this out now. A second vote is looking more and more likely.
 

toms

Vital Football Hero
#37
Sooner the better.

We need a People's Vote on the negotiated deal with option to Remain.
With the exception of your BC avatar which I obviously congratulate you on, I cannot agree with your sentiments (surprise surprise). Problem for you is that most people have seen what the EU is like in these "negotiations" and would vote out again in bigger numbers. But even if the result was close in your favour you would see the rise of Ukip again probably led by Farage. We would be very unlikely to get our rebate back if we scrapped things too and there would very likely be calls for best out of 3

Why don't you accept that you lost the vote from a position of strength

It doesn't have to be that many though, does it?

They are in trouble for spending £675,315 on a single donation. That is near as dammit ten percent of their entire budget. If you don't think they were spending it on something they considered to be worthwhile then you are complicit in the post-truth, fake news era.

And what of the roles of the liars in chief? Johnson, Gove, Cummings, Patel, Fox, Grayling, Stewart, Field, Lawson and new-boy Raab? These people were on the Vote Leave committee and must have known about the single biggest payment that the organisation made during the campaign. And they knew it was illegal.

It is disgusting. Rules are there for a reason. In some ways, it doesn't even matter whether it swayed enough voters to tip the balance or not. Democracy has been undermined by a referendum that is now known to have been based on lies and not 'free and fair'. I'm saddened that you don't think this is an issue, Toms. Your principal basis for voting leave was for parliamentary sovereignty and democracy. Despite both being horrifically undermined before and since the referendum, you continue to argue the toss.

You make a good point about Vince and Tim. With them, the government would have won by a single vote. Strong and Stable indeed. Parliament probably cannot sort this out now. A second vote is looking more and more likely.
Ive said its an issue and anyone shown to have recklessly or negligent breaking the rules should be punished but to suggest that we should annul the vote is ludicrous. Would you be arguing the same for a £1 overspend? The government spent considerably more than that on the leaflet they circulated

What is a clear breach of democracy are remainer MPs seeking continued participation in the customs union when both the conservative manifesto and the whole referendum process were predicated on us leaving the customs union
 

toms

Vital Football Hero
#38
Incidentally you've also lost the customs union vote.

Attempts to negate democracy are getting more and more desperate by the day

We don't want to be part of the EU institutions or participate automatically in their 4 freedoms. We want to have a decent partnership with them and that's about it.

If Canada can do a deal, so can we. And if we cant because the EU are intransigently blocking our way, I find it increasingly odd that remainers are happy to be associated with such a bossy and inflexible organisation
 

radfordinlondon

Vital Football Hero
#39
Incidentally you've also lost the customs union vote.

Attempts to negate democracy are getting more and more desperate by the day

We don't want to be part of the EU institutions or participate automatically in their 4 freedoms. We want to have a decent partnership with them and that's about it.

If Canada can do a deal, so can we. And if we cant because the EU are intransigently blocking our way, I find it increasingly odd that remainers are happy to be associated with such a bossy and inflexible organisation
Didn't realise u were carrying on ur nonsense here. It's called cake and eating it- unsurprisingly EU not likely to find that kind of deal very appetising.

I guess u don't play well with others
 

in_the_top_one

Vital Football Hero
#40
"Problem for you is that most people have seen what the EU is like in these "negotiations" "

What have they been like? Saying we can't have cake and eat out with a completely consistent stance from the outset, looking after the member states? What rotters. Don't they know we're better than them and they can't live without us?


" We would be very unlikely to get our rebate back"
Nope. We can cancel Article 50 and continue as was.