Crosswords14 mins ago
Ursula Von Der Leyen Wants To Extend The Leaving Date
Oh please No, how long must this debacle drag on ????
Answers
Jim, //So far it seems that the Brexiter's idea of a deal is "we leave and you keep giving us everything we want you suckers". // They're not 'giving' us anything. We pay very dearly for our association with the EU. Be realistic. Since we buy far more from them than they buy from us, they are not going to refuse to trade with us. That really is nonsense!
10:24 Thu 18th Jul 2019
Of course the Germans would want such a deal, but what will they want in return for that, and what are we prepared to give? So far it seems that the Brexiter's idea of a deal is "we leave and you keep giving us everything we want you suckers".
I'm heading away now anyway, so that probably brings an end to this particular round.
I'm heading away now anyway, so that probably brings an end to this particular round.
Jim, //So far it seems that the Brexiter's idea of a deal is "we leave and you keep giving us everything we want you suckers". //
They're not 'giving' us anything. We pay very dearly for our association with the EU. Be realistic. Since we buy far more from them than they buy from us, they are not going to refuse to trade with us. That really is nonsense!
They're not 'giving' us anything. We pay very dearly for our association with the EU. Be realistic. Since we buy far more from them than they buy from us, they are not going to refuse to trade with us. That really is nonsense!
She has also said that she still hoped the UK would abandon it’s plan to leave the EU
In the last few days we’ve had a no deal brexit will:
Cause recession, is a threat to research, economic growth would fall, and a somewhat intimidating “The UK will have to face the consequences” from Mr. Barnier.
I think the prospect of a new PM in a few days time who will be prepared for a no deal, is making them re-ignite project fear.
I’m sure tonight’s Panorama will be worth a watch.
In the last few days we’ve had a no deal brexit will:
Cause recession, is a threat to research, economic growth would fall, and a somewhat intimidating “The UK will have to face the consequences” from Mr. Barnier.
I think the prospect of a new PM in a few days time who will be prepared for a no deal, is making them re-ignite project fear.
I’m sure tonight’s Panorama will be worth a watch.
//Why bother with a trade deal with any country at all then?//
As I've said repeatedly, Jim, the Withdrawal "Agreement" is not a trade deal. It is simply an arrangement to allow life to go on without too much stupidity once we have left (i.e. to allow us to leave without being caused too much bother). All it does is leaves in place (some permanently, some temporarily) many of the arrangements that EU membership involves. It makes no mention of trade beyond those arrangements.
As I've said repeatedly, Jim, the Withdrawal "Agreement" is not a trade deal. It is simply an arrangement to allow life to go on without too much stupidity once we have left (i.e. to allow us to leave without being caused too much bother). All it does is leaves in place (some permanently, some temporarily) many of the arrangements that EU membership involves. It makes no mention of trade beyond those arrangements.
The Brexiter's idea of a deal is, "We leave properly and we agree a new deal which benefits both us and the EU nations". The EU Commission's ideal of a deal is, "Either you stay with us or we agree to nothing sensible nor reasonable because we don't care for you nor for our member nations' interests as long as we remain in control". The EU member nations seem to be taking the view that it's all to much for them, they'll let the EU elite refuse anything reasonable on their behalf, and take the hit from that folly. The remainer's idea of a deal is, "If it eventually turns out that we need to seem to come out, make sure that, that's an illusion and we stay in really".
Cause recession, we always knew that change will cost. The question is how much for how long. Looking at the latest estimates cheap at umpteen times the price.
A threat to research, only if those in power opt to force it so. We can't force the EU to be reasonable, merely make our own arrangements.
Economic growth would fall, same as the first point really. Growth rises and falls all the time. And one wonders if growth can keep rising to infinity and beyond anyway.
The UK will have to face the consequences”, as will the EU, including the Commission who seem hell bent on ensuring no-deal. But that's their choice.
A threat to research, only if those in power opt to force it so. We can't force the EU to be reasonable, merely make our own arrangements.
Economic growth would fall, same as the first point really. Growth rises and falls all the time. And one wonders if growth can keep rising to infinity and beyond anyway.
The UK will have to face the consequences”, as will the EU, including the Commission who seem hell bent on ensuring no-deal. But that's their choice.
Who read the reports made regarding Britain's influence on World trade that were made by Crawford Falconer, the former New Zealand ambassador to the World Trade Organisation? Who says... "that Britain has had “very little influence” on world trade as an EU member-state, with the bloc subjecting it to a Common Commercial Policy and external tariff regime."
The exact opposite of course of what the Remainiacs have been trying to peddle for years. He also went on to state.
"I always found it anomalous from the outside that the world’s fifth largest economy, as the UK has always been, really had very little to say, very little influence on the international trade system,” said Mr Facloner.
“I wasn’t surprised, I knew that that was the de facto case but that will change and has changed already [with Brexit],” he added.
“To me that change was self-evident and to everyone else I worked with from around the world. And that is changing rapidly now and will change ever more rapidly.”
The exact opposite of course of what the Remainiacs have been trying to peddle for years. He also went on to state.
"I always found it anomalous from the outside that the world’s fifth largest economy, as the UK has always been, really had very little to say, very little influence on the international trade system,” said Mr Facloner.
“I wasn’t surprised, I knew that that was the de facto case but that will change and has changed already [with Brexit],” he added.
“To me that change was self-evident and to everyone else I worked with from around the world. And that is changing rapidly now and will change ever more rapidly.”
"the Withdrawal "Agreement" is not a trade deal"
Fair enough. But agreeing that no one owes anyone anything and it's in everyone's interest to keep science and security interest as they are, should've taken about a day max; and then they could have got on with the trade arrangements over the rest of the two years. I can't be the only one who instinctively lumps all the necessary discussions together since all were needed; and it was the height of stupidity to insist agreement of one part first. In any case, normal practice is that if there's an issue, leave it for the meantime and sort out what can be agreed first. Then each has a stake, progress they don't wish to lose, and are more willing to compromise on the controversial.
Fair enough. But agreeing that no one owes anyone anything and it's in everyone's interest to keep science and security interest as they are, should've taken about a day max; and then they could have got on with the trade arrangements over the rest of the two years. I can't be the only one who instinctively lumps all the necessary discussions together since all were needed; and it was the height of stupidity to insist agreement of one part first. In any case, normal practice is that if there's an issue, leave it for the meantime and sort out what can be agreed first. Then each has a stake, progress they don't wish to lose, and are more willing to compromise on the controversial.
Of course she wants to extend it, all the time we keep paying.
I really am stuck on jims thinking on trade. Trade can and will continue, all that will change is that tarrifs will be applied. Currently we, the tax payers foot the tarif - big time, now the big companies like BMW will have to either take a cut in profits or pass it on to customers. Surely this is correct, why should all you tax payers have helped fund my BMW and my Merc?
Thanks anyway though.
I really am stuck on jims thinking on trade. Trade can and will continue, all that will change is that tarrifs will be applied. Currently we, the tax payers foot the tarif - big time, now the big companies like BMW will have to either take a cut in profits or pass it on to customers. Surely this is correct, why should all you tax payers have helped fund my BMW and my Merc?
Thanks anyway though.
//...and it was the height of stupidity to insist agreement of one part first.//
Indeed it was, OG. And most of that stupidity rests with the UK for agreeing the "linearity" of the discussions as determined by the EU. It took the best part of two years to discover that our exit fee would be £39bn (if indeed that is what it is). It started at £100bn as recall. No other decisions could be taken until that was agreed.
Indeed it was, OG. And most of that stupidity rests with the UK for agreeing the "linearity" of the discussions as determined by the EU. It took the best part of two years to discover that our exit fee would be £39bn (if indeed that is what it is). It started at £100bn as recall. No other decisions could be taken until that was agreed.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank17 mins ago
ChatterBank17 mins ago
House Insurance.....beware Of Big...
Insurance25 mins ago
Technology34 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.