Brexit (Old)

[Carth]

Yet more silly postings about politicians telling lies.

Please can we stop this nonsense, all politicians lie - to the public, their colleagues, and themselves . .

As for the letter in the Times . . totally believable, honest

---------- Post added at 12:42 ---------- Previous post was at 12:34 ----------

Originally Posted by Angua

(snippets) If we choose to leave with no deal we will end up losing much more in terms of trust from the rest of the world.

I'd much rather place trust in a Country that didn't back out on a promise to it's 'people'.

Would you trust the country who runs away from their responsibilities by burying their heads in the sand, not being grown up enough to negotiate some sort of deal.

Negotiation is a 2 way (27 way) thing, when all parties reach stalemate it probably means the end of negotiation.

Leaving with no deal would leave us with no choice but the sharks.

I like sharks

[Angua]

Originally Posted by Carth

Yet more silly postings about politicians telling lies.

Please can we stop this nonsense, all politicians lie - to the public, their colleagues, and themselves . .

As for the letter in the Times . . totally believable, honest

---------- Post added at 12:42 ---------- Previous post was at 12:34 ----------

May has created the stalemate by going back to the EU with a deal that parliament has resoundingly rejected.

How on earth is this productive in any way shape or form. You cannot blame the EU negotiators for this. They have agreed the deal with May, parliament overwhelmingly has not. Who is to blame here, cos it 'ain't the EU?

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Also, your claim we are the most diverse nation on the planet is factually incorrect - https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/...the-world.html

If by diverse, you mean by immigration

US, 45.8 Million
Russia, 11 Million
Germany, 9.8 Million
Saudi Arabia, 9.1 Million
UAE, 7.8 Million
UK, 7.8 Million
France, 7.4 Million
Canada, 7.3 Million

That's the top 8 countries hosting immigrants from different racial background and religions

I believe the first link counts many individual tribes that originate from the same country as a separate ethnicity, which should be understood when looking at the figures in the link. May be what you was alluding too anyway.

As for the immigration numbers above, they look a lot different when you compare those numbers to the square miles of each country and also the population of the indigenous population. As they say, likes, damn lies and statistics....its how you present the numbers.

As for Brexit, a vote was made and the results need to be honoured. How can any future vote be accepted by the population if we re-vote until we get the decision the most vocal want?

Of course the EU, Germany and other countries are trying their hardest to keep us in the EU, by saying nice things in newspapers of playing bully by politics. They want us in the EU as it benefits them. We paid way over and above in to the EU purse each year compared to most countries and they want our trade. They need us more than we need them which is why they are trying so hard to keep us.

After a no deal brexit we will sort out plenty of trade deals and other countries will see they can leave ok and this frightens the EU. They screwed themselves over giving ever increasing powers, dictating stuff they shouldn't have, throwing money all over the place funding fake projects which lead to so much money going in to the hands of the mafiaa and also white collar criminals and they thought they were unstoppable.

Being in a Europe wide Union is not so bad but not what the EU has become. Our leaving and success will be the first brick out of the wall and it will start crumbling. Of course they are going to try by hook or crook to get us to stay.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Angua

May has created the stalemate by going back to the EU with a deal that parliament has resoundingly rejected.

How on earth is this productive in any way shape or form. You cannot blame the EU negotiators for this. They have agreed the deal with May, parliament overwhelmingly has not. Who is to blame here, cos it 'ain't the EU?

The EU have stated, on more than one occasion I believe, that there will be no further concessions - their deal is on the table, take it or leave it.
May brought it back to the UK, which then rejected it.
May returns to the EU hoping for a changed deal, the EU say no.

Which party has it's head in the sand?

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by Angua

May has created the stalemate by going back to the EU with a deal that parliament has resoundingly rejected.

I secretly like to think that May, Corbyn,key politicians and the media have got together and made a pact to make May look incompetent by not changing any of the deal and making our whole government look like a shamble. Just to scare the EU in to thinking we will do a no deal brexit and that they need to change what they are offering. For the benefit of the UK in the future.

Then reality kicks in and what we see is exactly how it actually is.

Politics needs a restart with 3+ new political parties with new people. Labour is pointless existing, the conservatives have shown they only look after themselves and screw the country every chance they get and there is no other real options.

[Angua]

Originally Posted by Carth

The EU have stated, on more than one occasion I believe, that there will be no further concessions - their deal is on the table, take it or leave it.
May brought it back to the UK, which then rejected it.
May returns to the EU hoping for a changed deal, the EU say no.

Which party has it's head in the sand?

May went back to the EU with the agreed deal which was rejected by parliament. This is not negotiating for changes, this is just doing the same thing with an already agreed result. The EU has no need to change, they have agreed the deal as it stands.

There is nothing to say a leaner deal cannot be sought. Red lines can be erased.

Originally Posted by Qtx

I secretly like to think that May, Corbyn,key politicians and the media have got together and made a pact to make May look incompetent by not changing any of the deal and making our whole government look like a shamble. Just to scare the EU in to thinking we will do a no deal brexit and that they need to change what they are offering. For the benefit of the UK in the future.

The EU combined has a bigger market and larger GDP than we do. They'll still have the single market with each other whereas we'll have zero trade deals. They're about to add a trade deal with Japan forming the single biggest free trading zone in the world.

Losing one of it's biggest countries will be bad for the EU but whereas they lose the ability to trade without any friction with the UK we lose the ability to trade without any friction with all of them.

So where is the idea that they have to budge on their red lines and we don't have to move on ours coming from?

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Angua

If we choose to leave with no deal we will end up losing much more in terms of trust from the rest of the world. Negotiations on the trade deals we will need, will end up being less favourable as a result.

Would you trust the country who runs away from their responsibilities by burying their heads in the sand, not being grown up enough to negotiate some sort of deal. Would any other country trust our word, or would they know our desperation and screw us down as hard as they could.

Leaving with no deal would leave us with no choice but the sharks.

This is a major point of difference between us. The first duty of our politicians is to be trusted by their electorate. Lose that then much else is lost.

The rest of the world wants to trade with us and competent politicians would maintain trust at that level.

The Referendum majority was Leave and that is the first matter of trust that needs honouring.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Damien

The EU combined has a bigger market and larger GDP than we do. They'll still have the single market with each other whereas we'll have zero trade deals. They're about to add a trade deal with Japan forming the single biggest free trading zone in the world.

Losing one of it's biggest countries will be bad for the EU but whereas they lose the ability to trade freely with the UK we lose the ability to trade with all of them.

So where is the idea that they have to budge on their red lines and we don't have to move on ours coming from?

What a revelation. Could that be something to do with EU rules expressly forbidding any member seeking their own trade deals?

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by Damien

<snip>we'll have zero trade deals. </snip>

So where is the idea that they have to budge on their red lines and we don't have to move on ours coming from?

You don't think we will quickly do trade deals with the EU countries individually? I do.

Not only that, I suspect the same trade deal will pretty much be copy/pasted to most of the EU countries so that it can be enacted much faster. No doubt one or two countries will try and demand more than the others get but they will all want to trade and deals will be done.

You can argue over if we will be much better or worse off and only time will tell but companies want to sell products and trade deals between countries will be done.

Originally Posted by pip08456

What a revelation. Could that be something to do with EU rules expressly forbidding any member seeking their own trade deals?

Yes? I never contested otherwise. Neither the less we won't have any. In March we're going to leave the biggest trading zone there is where we could sell in some of the largest economies in the world such as France and Germany as if they were the same country and instead have to trade on W.T.O rules without any trade deals.

So I don't get where the idea is coming from that by going with no deal the EU will panic and fold. They might make some concessions but it seems we're unwilling to make any.

---------- Post added at 13:50 ---------- Previous post was at 13:49 ----------

Originally Posted by Qtx

You don't think we will quickly do trade deals with the EU countries individually? I do.

We can't. It's one of the Brexiters bigger complaints against the EU.

Besides the idea we can spilt the EU countries up and play them against each other in getting the exit deal didn't work.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Angua

May went back to the EU with the agreed deal which was rejected by parliament. This is not negotiating for changes, this is just doing the same thing with an already agreed result. The EU has no need to change, they have agreed the deal as it stands.

There is nothing to say a leaner deal cannot be sought. Red lines can be erased.

I'm really struggling to follow you here . .

Are you saying May went back to the EU and said "hey, here's that same deal we rejected once but can you offer the exact same deal again please?"

And this bit - The EU has no need to change, they have agreed the deal as it stands. - of course the EU have agreed the deal, it's a great deal for the EU, but not for the UK.

I understand that, as a remainer, the deal is probably acceptable to you though

[Qtx]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

The Referendum majority was Leave and that is the first matter of trust that needs honouring.
[/COLOR]

This.

Talk needs to be about how this is done. Any talk of no brexit or second referendums by politicians show that these politicians think they do not work for the people but are in power to enact their own will.

---------- Post added at 13:53 ---------- Previous post was at 13:50 ----------

Originally Posted by Damien

We can't. It's one of the Brexiters bigger complaints against the EU.

We can't finalise any deals until we leave but any leader would not be working for their country if they had not considered a post-exit trade deal and had some communication about it.

Deals will be done and quickly though, which was my point. Just can't deal with the EU who feel they have the upper hand. This will come back to bite them in time

Besides on Day One after we leave who will be the number 1 target for a trade deal? Who will be the easiest to trade with, one of the largest customers, one of the most wealthy? It will be the EU.

We're going to have to do a deal with them anyway. They're huge, rich and right on our door step. Why subject ourselves to economic harm rather than slowly transition with something like May's deal into that new relationship.

What part of being outside is suddenly going to change the dynamic of the terms of a deal? Especially when there will be immense pressure to get something done because at the moment we've not really lost anything, that's about to change.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Damien

{snip} They're huge, rich and right on our door step.

The EU as a whole entity are rich, but I would suggest certain parts are far from it