Brexit (Old)

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Look everybody - the question to ask is what is the £39 billion buying?

The Leavers will say it buys bugger all under this agreement; it won't even guarantee a trade deal because of the weasel wording of the Protocol.

The Remainers will say in that case we shouldn't leave.

Given that we're leaving, the Remainers should get real and back No Deal which guarantees us our sovereignty. We are the world's 5th or 6th largest economy and the initial dip will be just a blip.

The EU may well collapse anyway, which the Remainers haven't taken into account.

£39bn is our legal obligations, and if that’s not accepted as a reason to pay it the alternative is to buy stability.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...domestic-storm

Interesting final paragraph:

Gove turned down the job of Brexit secretary last week after May rejected his suggestion that the withdrawal agreement be renegotiated to alter the terms of the Irish backstop. Meanwhile, Leadsom is keen for the government to consider a “no deal plus” if parliament votes against the deal. Under that plan, the government would pay the EU £20bn – less than half the planned divorce payment – in exchange for a two-year transition period, during which the UK would prepare for operating on World Trade Organisation terms.

A Cabniet Minister implying we need two more years to prepare for no deal and it’d be worth £20bn to obtain it.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Well, with every poll now predicting that a better-informed electorate would majority back remain, Brexiters have been looking around for someone who disagrees with such polls.
I've always thought that you'd need the computational skills of Diane Abbott to think that the electorate would now majority back leave. And it appears I'm right. Diane Abbott has got her magic calculator out and believes that the British public would majority back leave!
No further questions m'lord!
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a8649256.html

The electorate is not better informed at all - With some Remainers still intent on selling project fear all the time - they are not well informed are they?

And not all polls have said that at all!!!

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Where have I been inconsistent?

I’ll take it that you swerved answering that, that it was a baseless comment.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

I’ll take it that you swerved answering that, that it was a baseless comment.

No, however as you are being selective you’d just ignore my valid points or deliberately misunderand them.

In the end your opinion over our negotiations are irrelevant, and it’s not an effective use of my time to explain when I’m quoting you, quoting ministers, quoting prominent leavers, quoting other posters, speaking from my own perspective or a general pro Brexit perspective. Others appear able to read the narrative and reach a level of understanding. I’m unsure what your difficulty is.

It’s circular, and a total sideshow as we continue our journey to remain in the EU on the 30th March 2019.

Oh just this once:

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...postcount=3628

You state here the EU haven’t felt threatened. You then object to me stating that your stance is that we threaten them!

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Mick

The electorate is not better informed at all - With some Remainers still intent on selling project fear all the time - they are not well informed are they?

And not all polls have said that at all!!!

If people aren't better informed after two years of non-stop Brexit news then they are in the slender minority.
Polls for Channel 4 by Survation and for various outlets by YouGov, etc all show a majority for remaining. Which polls support your assertion?

[jfman]

The problem with all of the polls is they are within the statistical margin of error. On top of this they remove “don’t know”, which isn’t an option on the actual ballot paper so is it reasonable to weight these the same? How do you split them? If the same as the rest of the poll is that reasonable to assume? If not, how?

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

and it’s not an effective use of my time to explain when I’m quoting you, quoting ministers, quoting prominent leavers, quoting other posters, speaking from my own perspective or a general pro Brexit perspective. Others appear able to read the narrative and reach a level of understanding. I’m unsure what your difficulty is.

That how debates on a discussion site are undertaken. You have citations for your quotes, and back up facts with links. That way we know what is your opinion, someone else’s opinion and what is fact.

It’s circular, and a total sideshow as we continue our journey to remain in the EU on the 30th March 2019.

You state here the EU haven’t felt threatened. You then object to me stating that your stance is that we threaten them!

Now who’s being selective? And misinterpreting.
Feeling threatened and being threatening are two different things.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Now who’s being selective? And misinterpreting.
Feeling threatened and being threatening are two different things.

Feeling threatened in a two sided negotiation can only result from the actions of the other party. That’s not selective it’s a fact. The dictionary may help you in this regard.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Look everybody - the question to ask is what is the £39 billion buying?

The Leavers will say it buys bugger all under this agreement; it won't even guarantee a trade deal because of the weasel wording of the Protocol.

The Remainers will say in that case we shouldn't leave.

Given that we're leaving, the Remainers should get real and back No Deal which guarantees us our sovereignty. We are the world's 5th or 6th largest economy and the initial dip will be just a blip.

The EU may well collapse anyway, which the Remainers haven't taken into account.

To elaborate further, the £39 billion buys potentially perpetual EU veto on our exit from the customs arrangements.

Furthermore, there is no incentive for the EU other than to squeeze our pips in the eventual trade negotiations.

Leavers & Remainers are united in the declaring the current proposals to be worse than disastrous.

But surely the Remainers can concede that the EU is not nice to deal with and there are real grounds for breaking away properly.

[jfman]

I fail to see how being nice (or otherwise) comes into it.

The UK are proposing to act in a way that harms the economic interests of both the UK and EU, it’s only sensible and appropriate for the EU to mitigate against this.

If, for example, Scotland were to vote for independence do you think they should renege on debts or it’s share of financial commitments to the UK? Should it’s citizens for example be entitled to a UK State Pension (they paid in after all) without Scotland contributing to the cost? Or would you say they should cover that?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

£39bn is our legal obligations, and if that’s not accepted as a reason to pay it the alternative is to buy stability.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...domestic-storm

Interesting final paragraph:



A Cabniet Minister implying we need two more years to prepare for no deal and it’d be worth £20bn to obtain it.

I cannot see why on Earth the EU would agree to that! It is very clear anyway that they are not up for re-negotiation.

[jfman]

I agree they have no interest in renegotiating, I just find it interesting that there’s a monetary value to our desperation.

[1andrew1]

Interesting article here. Despite jfman's well-argued points, there would not be a Parliamentary majority to remain. So, if came to a no-deal and the current deal and the markets were getting jittery, MPs might just support the current plan despite the opposition against it.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Interesting article here. Despite jfman's well-argued points, there would not be a Parliamentary majority to remain. So, if came to a no-deal and the current deal and the markets were getting jittery, MPs might just support the current plan despite the opposition against it.

Oh I agree if you got everyone together tomorrow that it wouldn’t happen. As the Chancellor says though who is to predict what may happen in the chaos if this deal doesn’t pass.

My prediction relies upon the late sobering reality of no deal hitting people who campaigned to remain in 2016 but “back” leave post-referendum. Kick the can down the road or second referendum become more realistic to validate no deal, and give the politicians an out at future general elections if the economy plunges.

[Mr K]

It's all a bit of a shambles really isn't it? All to try and keep Cameron his job. It's ended up dividing the country and a causing a potential economic crisis. Dave's doing ok though, talking of a comeback Remember 'we're 'all in this (mess) together ! '