Yet the arguments won't die and as more people get laid off, as moped crime and acid attacks increase and the simple logic that in 20 years no party has built enough houses.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Yet the arguments won't die and as more people get laid off, as moped crime and acid attacks increase and the simple logic that in 20 years no party has built enough houses.
Knock yourself out, they posted it and all their negotiating positions back in may, free for anyone to download and look at.
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/bre...ts-article-50-negotiations-united-kingdom_en#
It must take real effort to be this uninformed.
Brexiteers want it down to the penny, otherwise it doesn't count.
None of which has anything to do with the EU.
I was trying to find the correlation too...
If you are referring to TF50(2017) 2/2 Commission to UK, it was dated 12th of June, not May and it was their supposed negotiating position. It was not a 'divorce bill', never looked anything like a divorce bill, so how come their argument is we haven't agreed to anything yet..? Its nonsense, its either a 'bill' we owe they are presenting for payment,(which needs to be itemised) or its an EU platform for negotiation with the UK on what the EU thinks should be settled.
If the EU wants a 'bill' paying it needs to present it, itemised, we can agree (or not) to settle that bill then as part of the negotiations they refer to in the above document. Simples!
Mrs May has already in Florence indicated the 'bill' size we think is correct and the general consensus seemed to be that allowed further progress, but at the moment it doesn't seem likely, so the cliff edge looms nearer!
Well done, not only do you highlight your complete lack of understanding of the negotiations themselves, but of why may is making such a balls up of it.
The negotiating position outlines the pro rate payments for the projects and financial commitments we have made that go beyond the end of our membership. That includes several loans, and things like MEP and British EU worker pensions and severance pay (Farage gets €80K a year non-contributory pension for instance, plus €150K severance pay).
That is all they want to agree, how the final figure will be calculated. May;s response was to say they didn't agree. That was in June. The question then becomes, what part of the calculation do you not agree with. That is the answer we have been waiting for for talks to progress (that and a solution for Northern Ireland, another part of the agreed negotiation timetable).
As you know, May;s response to the question 'what don;t you agree with about the calculations and how would you amend it' was given at a speech in florence. She replies 'I'll send you £20 billion'.
So now they ask what is that £20 billion for? They still don;t know what she disagrees with in the calculations, she hasn't told them what calculations she wants, just a number.
Its like sitting in a restaurant, and when asked what you would like off the menu, replying 968 calories.
The reality is that the delays are down to us, and us alone, because may cannot give an actual answer, because the calculations of our liabilities will be at least €40 billion, €20 for ongoing access to the single market during transition, €20 for our pension and employment liabilities, plus whatever loans and other schemes we have signed up to. And boris and the other headbangers will have her head if she promises to meet those commitments at that much money, despite us already promising to pay for them.
You really have no idea do you? No its not the final figure to be agreed, but what's involved in reaching that final figure, but it contains nothing about what Britain has already (over)paid for in the past, what assets we hold in joint ownership with the EU, what rebates we would have received, etc.
The EU's position is to say to Britain, first of all you have to agree to all our demands involving areas for payment, to all our assumptions about what you owe us for in the past, (involves pensions etc.) or might in the future owe, if you had remained in the EU, you even need to agree to pay for the things that even we don't currently know how much is involved or when it might fall due and then when you've agreed to everything we say, we can discuss how much you will be charged.
Its rubbish, nonsense and perfectly in keeping with the EU grasp on its own 'Alice in Wonderland' reality.
More people will probably get laid off but that's due to Brexit. There is very low unemployment in the UK. As for acid attacks, are they ordered from Brussels? Is there an EU directive stipulating house building limits?
Well prior to Brexit the political media kept telling us we could not stop immigration due to the EU, make no mistake it is not just EU immigration we want drastically lowered.
The laying off is due to globalization, not training current staff and bringing in skilled (trained) workers from abroad on lower salaries. I agree future lay-offs from Brexit might occur in certain sectors.
Re acid attacks see my earlier point to Kentonio.
Housebuilding - the MPs won't significantly reduce it so voters decided for them, cut the demand.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41681058
Interesting point that due to Catalonia patriotism is very high in Spain right now... how might this could the Gibraltar issue / brexit
Interesting point that due to Catalonia patriotism is very high in Spain right now... how might this could the Gibraltar issue / brexit
No it was the Daily Heil and all the associated RW press, you were lied to yet again and you do surprise me that it's not only the EU immigration you want to reduce.
Reminds me of an old advert for Kwik Fit - went something like, "you can't get thicker than a UKIP Brexiter" or something along those lines.
A few highlights:
Any answers Bretards?
That's basically a summary of what the remoaners have been saying in this thread.
If I do a survey/poll in England, what would be the results?
% happy
% unhappy
% I don't know
% happy
% unhappy
% I don't know
Does he have any new document or report?
Not sure why particular discussion lasts this long. It is glaringly obvious that vote was all about immigration in vast majority of cases or people with nothing to lose already just going for it in a hope that a massive shock might turn out to be a success (that's actually sad state of affairs), since any other point is either very weak or completely wrong no matter how hard people are trying to spin it.
Last edited:
Thank god you are here to explain it all we have been wading through pages and pages of bullshitters to find someone who can finally put this question to bed.
How many billions of Euros does the EU say the UK should pay it in order to be allowed to leave it?
I don't want to be willfully misinformed anymore, you have your link which explains it all so clearly that you would have to be an enormous ass not to be able to answer that question even if you are just Joe Normal.
Anyone who can assert that not being able to come up with a number based on the obvious facts spelled out in your link is willfully misinforming themselves, well they would make short work of the issues.
So childhood cartoon evil character,
The EU wants the UK to pay the EU how many billion Euros to be allowed to leave?
Last edited:
You can leave whenever and however you want, you don't need the EU permission and the EU never said anything close to that.
The UK isn't paying to leave the EU. The UK will pay it's obligations to have any hope of it's politicians being taken seriously again at some point in the future. The final amount will be decided by a process that adds up all the obligations, i'm sure this isn't news to you... I'm convinced the EU already knows how much it thinks the UK committed to, and is keeping its lips tight out of courtesy to Ms. May.
Brexiteers complaining about the EU has become amusing though. They still think they should have a say about the EU's actions, watching them on Sky news is great entertainment at the moment. The other night there was a tory saying: "We've moved enough now... bla bla Lancaster... bla bla Florence... It's time the EU moves now". Still hasn't understood that it's his governments job to get the EU to move, still hasn't understood how the EU works. As sad as I am to see the British leave... these tories can get lost.
Ah that's for free and you can leave now. The trouble is that the UK wants to leave the Union and yet it still wants to keep doing unrestricted business with this 'undemocratic' union. Well that's not going to happen unless the UK settles the so called three big issues
May admits Brexit negotiations have hit 'difficulty' for first time
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/pol...e-hit-difficulty-for-first-time-a3663346.html
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/pol...e-hit-difficulty-for-first-time-a3663346.html
What I do find funny is for Brexiters to expect a trade deal from the EU after they previously demonised it and they had worked so hard to leave the union. You would expect them to be itching to leave and yet here they are, in Brussels, begging for a trade deal.
Which makes you wonder. Can the UK really thrive without the EU?
Last edited:
The other hilarious position Brexiters take is “well of course the EU will ensure a deal because it would harm them economically not to”
Rather forgetting that they are themselves evidence that people don’t act rationally, and make decisions based on emotion and feeling rather than economic reality.
Again it’s this British exceptionalism at work: “We can lash out at the EU in an emotional and irrational way, but there will be no backlash, only logical responses”
Last edited:
Since the banking crisis not many sectors have thrived, I would say leaving is about surviving rather than thriving and having the freedom to make our own decisions.
Surviving by crippling the financial industry which bankrolls a large part of the countries finances? That's some 4 dimensional chess shit you're playing there.
Bullyocracy.
Bullyocracy.
Ironically, Democracy would mean that the 27 voices on one side of the table have more weight than the one voice on the other side.
That's fair enough, however will 'surviving' suffice to the UK public including Brexiteers? You see, the Brexit campaign was mostly about getting rid of the 'wasteful' EU which 'kept the UK down'. It promised a much better standard of living, complete control over the fishing industry, millions injected in the NHS which is literally dying, control over immigration and the prospect of a truly global Britain who will be a financial superpower in the world. The Brexiteers portrayed a world were countries will be queuing to get a trade deal with the UK and most of those trade deals will be heavily staked towards the UK and are way better to the ones currently negotiated by the EU. Trade deals such as the TTIP were heavily criticised by the UK as yet, another restrictive deal, done by the incompetent EU, which will end up screwing the UK out.
Which makes me wonder. What if the UK ends up way worse off then it is now? What if, surviving would mean accepting more immigration rather then less immigration? What these so called trade deals leave the UK battered and humiliated as concessions will be made (ex fishing or farming) which will leave the very industry who voted for Brexit feel cheated? What if the very idea of a tactical retreat is not an option anymore or will leave the UK part of the EU (either through EEA or even EU member) but worse off (ie no rebates)?
As I said before, I worked in politics (local not EU) and I assure you that from a political perspective that's suicide. The party I was part of did something similar when they foolishly promised to get rid of the VAT only to introduce a messy replacement instead. That government collapsed after just 2 years and it took the labour party 15 years to win another GE. Now, the British people might be far more forgiving then us Maltesers. However the VAT's mess up is nothing compared to Brexit.
Last edited:
Bullyocracy.
I thought the EU were being bullied into accepting all the UK's terms because the EU needs the UK more.
Brexiters living in Idiocracy.
It's a good thing I am not negotiating because at this point I would have told them all that we're clearly not going to arrive at a deal that everyone is going to sign off on - so we might as well save our oxygen and just walk away. There will be no divorce payment and we will go to WTO rules. I probably would have brought up the war as well and sounded like the little Englander I am, so a good thing for all involved that I am nowhere near it!
I could not be bothered responding. I am giving up arguing with three people in this thread. You don't argue with the bloke with a can of Special Brew at the bus stop, do you?
Latest I heard through (a long seties of) Chinese whispers is that the EU is stonewalling the trade deal while coming up with a new approach to immigration policy (across the EU). The idea being that the UK government can present staying (in some shape or form) as avoiding economic catastrophe while addressing the big issue from last year's referendum.
It's not a divorce payment, it's just that the money the UK owes. it can run away but it's international reputation will be shot to pieces. Secondly the UK cannot go to WTO rules, because it does not belong to the WTO without reapplying which takes time which is why the UK is asking for a transition period - hence the expression falling off a cliff-edge - ie UK paralysed.
Thirdly what the hell has the war got to do with it.
He's going to threaten to get the Russians to fight them again.
feck I hope that's true. It would have genuine long term effects on my life plans.
