Worlds Most Dangerous Roads - Vietnam...
Film, Media & TV1 min ago
So It's Confirmed We Are Ready For No Deal, Even The Cbi Think We Are Not....
161 Answers
https:/
on the basis that the CBI thinks the opposite of reality is there no better indicator that we are ready?
on the basis that the CBI thinks the opposite of reality is there no better indicator that we are ready?
Answers
Ellipsis - // In the lace seller scenario, no deal means keep the status quo i.e. remain. // No, it does not mean that. What it means is, there are plenty more lace sellers in the town, and plenty more customers, and on this occasion, we are not going to deal together, maybe tomorrow we will, tomorrow is another day, but for now, I am going to look elsewhere, and so is...
16:55 Mon 29th Jul 2019
//jim, can you have a go at the judges question:...//
And answer came there none.
I think the difficulty for those who insist that No Deal is out of the question is that they don't have an alternative. If that option is "taken off the table" all the EU has to do is to sit back, carry on with the important business of uprooting itself ten times a year between Brussels and Strasbourg and simply wait for either (a) the UK Parliament to accede to its demands (aka "The Withdrawal Agreement") or (b) give up on the idea of leaving altogether.
I cannot understand how anybody would prefer to see this country in that position. We are supposed to be an independent sovereign nation. Our Parliament endorsed the idea of holding a referendum and the result of that was a vote to leave. Parliament voted by five to one to trigger A50 and subsequently a new Parliament was formed where 80% of those elected stood on a manifesto to leave the EU. Just how much more endorsement must there be? All that has happened in the meantime is that the EU - aided and abetted by Mrs May - has unsurprisingly devised (not "negotiated") a list of demands and a hefty bill laying out the conditions it deems necessary for a "smooth" so-called departure. What should any self-respecting nation do when faced with that? However bad the fallout might be (which is highly speculative) you don't give in to bullying. If you do, the bullying continues and worsens and if the terms of the "deal" seem unacceptable, just wait until a trade agreement is discussed.
And answer came there none.
I think the difficulty for those who insist that No Deal is out of the question is that they don't have an alternative. If that option is "taken off the table" all the EU has to do is to sit back, carry on with the important business of uprooting itself ten times a year between Brussels and Strasbourg and simply wait for either (a) the UK Parliament to accede to its demands (aka "The Withdrawal Agreement") or (b) give up on the idea of leaving altogether.
I cannot understand how anybody would prefer to see this country in that position. We are supposed to be an independent sovereign nation. Our Parliament endorsed the idea of holding a referendum and the result of that was a vote to leave. Parliament voted by five to one to trigger A50 and subsequently a new Parliament was formed where 80% of those elected stood on a manifesto to leave the EU. Just how much more endorsement must there be? All that has happened in the meantime is that the EU - aided and abetted by Mrs May - has unsurprisingly devised (not "negotiated") a list of demands and a hefty bill laying out the conditions it deems necessary for a "smooth" so-called departure. What should any self-respecting nation do when faced with that? However bad the fallout might be (which is highly speculative) you don't give in to bullying. If you do, the bullying continues and worsens and if the terms of the "deal" seem unacceptable, just wait until a trade agreement is discussed.
Alternative theory: I have been busy with other things yesterday so never got back to it.
As it happens I am busy right now but I'll come back later, although there again it's becoming increasingly tricky to summon up the motivation to debate on AB when half the people I'm debating with seem determined to do naught but suggest I'm trying to fool people, that I think everybody on here is stupid, etc etc.
As it happens I am busy right now but I'll come back later, although there again it's becoming increasingly tricky to summon up the motivation to debate on AB when half the people I'm debating with seem determined to do naught but suggest I'm trying to fool people, that I think everybody on here is stupid, etc etc.
Then again, I'm also confused why I'm being badgered to "answer NJ's question" [about what I'd rather do] , when I already did:
// That leaves either the current deal or the cancellation of the idea altogether -- after appropriate consultation, of course. //
Clearly I would prefer the latter -- nothing in the last three years has given me any reason to doubt my original conviction that staying in the EU is best for the UK's future. I don't accept NJ's interpretation of the negotiation period as the EU "bullying" us. What bullying rhetoric there is has been entirely the other direction -- Mark Francois and others in the ERG, for example, talking about the need for the EU to be "brought to heel" -- and also entirely lacking in appreciation of the relative sizes and influences of the two parties to the negotiation.
// That leaves either the current deal or the cancellation of the idea altogether -- after appropriate consultation, of course. //
Clearly I would prefer the latter -- nothing in the last three years has given me any reason to doubt my original conviction that staying in the EU is best for the UK's future. I don't accept NJ's interpretation of the negotiation period as the EU "bullying" us. What bullying rhetoric there is has been entirely the other direction -- Mark Francois and others in the ERG, for example, talking about the need for the EU to be "brought to heel" -- and also entirely lacking in appreciation of the relative sizes and influences of the two parties to the negotiation.
Clearly I'd prefer the latter, as I say, but if we must leave, then let it be with the understanding that separating the UK from the EU is a lengthy and involved process, requiring 4+ decades of integration to be reversed in as smooth as way as possible, rather than torn apart, or an axe taken to the conjoined parts of the two parties.
And finally -- sorry for the multiple posts -- but as to Khandro's question at 8:47 on Tuesday, it's not a question worth answering. I have no hidden agenda, and despite many people's repeated attempts to persuade otherwise, I mean what I say, I believe in it wholeheartedly, and I approach every discussion on here in good faith.
jim; //nothing in the last three years has given me any reason to doubt my original conviction that staying in the EU is best for the UK's future. //
But in the EU the UK (as such) doesn't have a future, - the future is its capitulation to government by an un elected bureaucracy. Do you know anything about the new president of the commission for example?
As for my question "What are you scared of" being not worthy of an answer, I think that is side-stepping the question which several people might like to hear the answer to.
But in the EU the UK (as such) doesn't have a future, - the future is its capitulation to government by an un elected bureaucracy. Do you know anything about the new president of the commission for example?
As for my question "What are you scared of" being not worthy of an answer, I think that is side-stepping the question which several people might like to hear the answer to.
As we listen to Boris Johnson as he continues to speak about his plans for Brexit, it is clear that he is finally doing what the negotiators would have done from Day One - assure the EU that we will leave with no deal if we have to, but we would prefer a deal, as would they, so let's start working one out in advance of 31 October.
As NJ has pointed out, failure to adopt this stance simply leaves the EU waiting us out, and who would blame them? They didn't fight for that controlling situation, or even negotiate for it - it was handed to them by the negotiators who were idiots unfit for purpose.
As NJ has pointed out, failure to adopt this stance simply leaves the EU waiting us out, and who would blame them? They didn't fight for that controlling situation, or even negotiate for it - it was handed to them by the negotiators who were idiots unfit for purpose.
Indeed pix - with hindsight, we can now see that Teresa May - a Remainer, only pretended to follow her duty as PM to enact the wishes of the electorate, behind the scenes she was simply letting the EU spin it out until, as Michael Heseltine rather amusingly thinks - all the 'leave' voters have really died, not just in his turgid irrelevant imagination!
Tell you what, Khandro, you tell me what you think I'm scared of (if it's not the threat of economic recession, risk of diminishing status of the UK in foreign affairs, loss of influence in matters scientific, etc), and I'll tell you if you were right or not. But personally I think what I put in the brackets is enough to be going along with.
> As for my question "What are you scared of"
"Scared of" would be the wrong phrase, but I'd be "concerned about" those that suffer the most economic impact from a No Deal Brexit being those of working age that voted Leave, and they will expect to be supported through their hardship by the "Liberal Elite" Remain voters who could well tell them, in various ways, to get stuffed.
"Scared of" would be the wrong phrase, but I'd be "concerned about" those that suffer the most economic impact from a No Deal Brexit being those of working age that voted Leave, and they will expect to be supported through their hardship by the "Liberal Elite" Remain voters who could well tell them, in various ways, to get stuffed.
jim; //tell me what you think I'm scared of (if it's not the threat of economic recession, risk of diminishing status of the UK in foreign affairs, loss of influence in matters scientific,//
Many top people in the world of finance - even the ex-governor of the Bank of England - are not worried. The status of the UK in foreign affairs might even be advanced by independence instead of being a subsidiary of the united states of Europe.
Isaac Newton to Charles Darwin to Francis Crick to Tim Berners-Lee,
all managed without the European Union.
Many top people in the world of finance - even the ex-governor of the Bank of England - are not worried. The status of the UK in foreign affairs might even be advanced by independence instead of being a subsidiary of the united states of Europe.
Isaac Newton to Charles Darwin to Francis Crick to Tim Berners-Lee,
all managed without the European Union.
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.