on the EU position, i dont understand why a few weeks ago there were "hints", "overtues", made that minor alteration to the agreement could be made. they could help get the deal over the line, if some fine detail, wording could change. now they state it cannot be changed, when they know the deal was refused. i know its all game theory, just dont get the hardening when its not needed. they set themselve for a climb down, or force no deal, on hope of extension (doesnt resolve the core issue) or abandonment (does anyone seriously see how that will happen?)
Even MoS has finally realised No deal is entirely possible, shirley it would be easier to admit what is pretty obvious to most people rather than continue with this tedious routine of pretending you know more than people who are clearly better informed
Some politicians are completely unashamed about their capacity for deceit........
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...-When-it-becomes-serious-you-have-to-lie.html
Who would have thought it.......
Your insistence that I am a Tory only serves to highlight your political ignorance I'm afraid - the same political ignorance that suggests I'm happy to swallow your points when you consistently post links to prove them that end up doing nothing of the sort. Come on, you're better than that - and the same goes for pulling up someone for writing the word "father" and augmenting it with a pathetic and risible "my old man's a dustman" routine. Plenty of people write (or sing) words they might not say - unless you're writing off half of working class South Wales for daring to sing "Land of my fathers"? As for your point here, I accept that it is well made, except to say that it side-steps the point I was making. You say you want Brexit to further socialism, I say that remaining protects workers more than leaving because this country continues to vote the Conservatives into power when faced with a socialist alternative. Hell, even when the Tories are this appalling, socialist-led Labour are still nowhere near them, sadly - and I mean "sadly". I'm not socialist but they would do no worse than this shower. So yes, your lone voice does not make you wrong, but it is devoid of any pragmatism.
For you to say this suggests to me that you fundamentally misunderstand why border controls are ever necessary. In order to have frictionless borders, you need three planks in place:
1) an approximate alignment of tariffs. Where tariffs differ between two neighbouring economic zones, you need checks. In a practical example, tariffs into the EU are the same regardless of where you enter the zone, so currently it makes no difference whether a ship docks into Belfast or Ireland's Bantry Bay. This is what the Customs Union is for. However, if the EU and UK are different zones, that is no longer the case.
2) an alignment of regulations. Currently, member states in the EU economic zone are governed by the same regulations (well, almost but I'll come to that in #3). That means that we all know what sort of chicken we're seeing packed in supermarkets because it has all conformed to the same standards. This bit is otherwise known as the single market. When the UK leaves, we are no longer governed by those regulations and we can start chlorinating it chicken if we like to increase shelf life. The EU considers this quite revolting of course, and will need to check chicken flowing into its member states. (The same could apply the other way round of course)
3) where 2 member states disagree over the implementation of regulations in #2, you need a court to arbitrate and make that decision. By leaving the EU, we're insisting on bailing out of this too.
So where any one of those 3 planks are missing, you need a border. That's just a fact. Wales and England? All 3 boxes ticked, no problem. Netherlands and Belgium? Same again. Now look at an interesting example: Sweden and Norway. Norway is inside the single market, accepts EFTA Court jurisdiction, but is OUTSIDE the common market. Result? There are borders all across Sweden and Norway. Customs on either side will only stop lorries and trade vehicles because Norway is in the single market (accepting freedom of movement) and in Schengen by association, but it is not inside the customs union.
So advanced, closely aligned nations like Norway and Sweden HAVE customs - because they have to. Anyone who thinks there will be no border after Brexit is deluded. Not surprisingly, senior Brexit people continue to spin lies and bullshit about how new technology make it unnecessary. It is simply a lie and it is certainly not "egos and political point scoring" preventing it. That is just meaningless shite designed to make you feel better about hating the EU.
What if he was joking when he said "When it becomes serious, you have to lie,"? And if he was serious, was he lying?
A comment like that says a great deal about yours and others attitude to Ireland on Brexit. An ignorant, or in your case deliberate because you're sad enough to find it amusing, reference to the Irish, food and poverty, despite the historical connotations to it. Very reminiscent of your like-minded Brexiteer Priti Patel's comments prior to Christmas that went down like a stone in Ireland. The general condescending attitude to Ireland on Brexit by English Brexiteers like you is revealing - basically they should know their place. Typical English arrogant, faux omnipotence at it's worst.
I appreciate you're stuck in a 1970's time-warp, but I also wonder if you're the sort of person who still finds 'There was an Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman' jokes funny? Perhaps you regale middle class friends with those jokes over a fondue set dinner party and a bottle of Blue Nun? (Do they sell Blue Nun in Waitrose or do you go online?)
Even MoS has finally realised No deal is entirely possible
I would at first check out the providence of the man’s conduct.......
https://www.theguardian.com/busines...blocked-eu-curbs-on-tax-avoidance-cables-show
I would promptly conclude he is a lying Tory shit that couldn’t be trusted.
But the question is, what compromise can they make? The Tory party / DUP wont accept other options, therefore whatever the EU suggests won't be satisfactory. Thus, if the backstop suits Ireland and the alternatives wouldn't be accepted in Britain, one can hardly pin this on the EU (which is what the government and papers want to try and do).
As Luxembourg PM, he wanted to maintain the ability to attract large corporations to Luxembourg through low tax liabilities, because it was good for Luxembourg. Now he is on the other side of the fence and is wanting to reduce the ability of member states to give corporations an easy ride in that way. Poacher turned Gamekeeper, if you like.
There are few saints in politics, Juncker isn't one of them, but he is not half as bad as your bedfellows, Mogg and Johnson.
I worry about you, I understand that to meet your responsibilities, you earn your crust in a way that produces nothing of use, I assume you realise that when you win, someone else loses, and yet you show utter contempt for someone else who acts similarly to meet his responsibilities, in your case to increase the prosperity of yourself and family, and in his, to do likewise for his country.
But you're happy to abide by WTO rules.
No, I would rather a deal, but a good deal. No deal is a consequence that provides leverage for a good deal.
I worry about you, Juncker was at the epicentre of a global corporatist tax dodge in Luxembourg. If you want to excuse him for facilitating that mechanism so that huge multinationals avoided paying their fair share in the nations that they operated in so that Directors could get even bigger bonuses that’s your lookout.
As I say this board is soaking in Tories.
PS you don’t know what I do for a living, all the innuendo from you and your fellow travellers on this thread about me is flattering but a bit in the style of the classic box room furious masturbator.
No innuendo intended, I think it was fairly direct.
I am saying his policies were good for Luxembourg, even if morally and ethically questionable, but his role as Leader of Luxembourg was to ensure prosperity there, and you cannot say he was unsuccessful in that. As a small nation, there are limited ways to do it, he chose a way that was effective for Luxembourg and detrimental to the rest of the EU.
I don't know exactly what you do, but I have an idea, so hand on heart, can you say that when you have your best pay days, it isn't to someone else's detriment?
Do you produce something of use in society, aside from your income taxes?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47055188
Car investment HALVES.
More bad news that will affect industry and the man on the street as car manafacturers sound red alert . Still, on our way, eh.
Beat me to it just read the same report this is really getting serious even Brexitees must start to see the damage that voting to leave is doing!!!!!!!
They will find some way to dismiss it.