[Politics] Brexit

[WATFORD zero]

If we are not in the Single Market,we can make deals with anybody.How do you think France and Germany do deals with other countries?Do they ask the rest of the EU before they sell anything?

You have genuinely surprised me. You are actually even more stupid than I thought you were.

And trust me, that is a very low bar you've just ducked

 

[Two Professors]

[tweet]1030413079459389441[/tweet]

We are leaving,so perhaps a bit of training would not go amiss.The NHS waste more than that on paperclips.

 

[Two Professors]

You have surprised me. You are actually even more stupid than I thought you were.

And trust me, that is a very low bar you've just ducked

You are Craig Pawson and I claim my free copy of the Grauniad.Have you asked the other moron to come out to play?Or is he thinking up new fables for you?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

We are leaving,so perhaps a bit of training would not go amiss.The NHS waste more than that on paperclips.

That's alright then.

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

This conversation between Jason Hunter (who has done billions of dollars of trade deals) and Nigel Farage is interesting.

[tweet]1030788975273955328[/tweet]

That clip really shows Farage up for what he really is, a total prat.
He had no argument, blown out of the water and just gave some stupid reply and cut him off.
That bloke really knows what he was talking about.
We cannot trade under WTO rules.
End of argument on that.

 

[larus]

This conversation between Jason Hunter (who has done billions of dollars of trade deals) and Nigel Farage is interesting.

[tweet]1030788975273955328[/tweet]

It's semantics. The caller is trying to make the point that the legislation which the UK government has passed will stop us negotiating trade deals if we don't change the situation on the NI/ROI border and record import/export activity.

First, if we exit with No Deal and trade on WTO and there is no physical border on either side of the border, then both the UK and EU would be falling foul of WTO. Why? Because trade goes both ways. Our exports to ROI are their Imports and Vice Versa. So, whatever stick you want to use against the UK equally applies to the EU. And that's a FACT. One thing to be aware of is that, if there are political issues which make a physical border impractical, then you are allowed to not have one.

Next, the callers point was his INTERPRETATION of the legislation. No more than that. We can put technology in place to monitor the activity even if we don't have any infrastructure.

You really should try to understand what you are posting first.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

'The way the country is collapsing around your ears you'll all be living in 3rd world conditions very shortly.' these aren't predictions

Please re-read this sentence. Aren’t[sic] predictions? I cannot think of a better example of a prediction.

1) Do you not understand what the word prediction means?
2) Do you actually think when you write?

You really are a twit, and an illiterate one at that.

 

[The Merry Prankster]

If we are not in the Single Market,we can make deals with anybody.How do you think France and Germany do deals with other countries?Do they ask the rest of the EU before they sell anything?

They negotiate their trade deals as a block. We have to have a trade agreement with the EU in order to trade with France and Germany. No trade agreement, no trade. So effectively, yes they do ask the rest of the EU before they sell anything.

We could operate under WTO but I've yet to hear anyone, who actually trades, say anything good about that idea.

 

[CHAPPERS]

It's semantics. The caller is trying to make the point that the legislation which the UK government has passed will stop us negotiating trade deals if we don't change the situation on the NI/ROI border and record import/export activity.

First, if we exit with No Deal and trade on WTO and there is no physical border on either side of the border, then both the UK and EU would be falling foul of WTO. Why? Because trade goes both ways. Our exports to ROI are their Imports and Vice Versa. So, whatever stick you want to use against the UK equally applies to the EU. And that's a FACT. One thing to be aware of is that, if there are political issues which make a physical border impractical, then you are allowed to not have one.

Next, the callers point was his INTERPRETATION of the legislation. No more than that. We can put technology in place to monitor the activity even if we don't have any infrastructure.

You really should try to understand what you are posting first.

What technology?

 

[daveinprague]

What technology?

Beat me to it. The word 'technology' is a bit on the vague side.
What we can do, maybe, perhaps, could, what I think will happen is, possibly etc etc...Its all a bit vague really.

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

It's semantics. The caller is trying to make the point that the legislation which the UK government has passed will stop us negotiating trade deals if we don't change the situation on the NI/ROI border and record import/export activity.

First, if we exit with No Deal and trade on WTO and there is no physical border on either side of the border, then both the UK and EU would be falling foul of WTO. Why? Because trade goes both ways. Our exports to ROI are their Imports and Vice Versa. So, whatever stick you want to use against the UK equally applies to the EU. And that's a FACT. One thing to be aware of is that, if there are political issues which make a physical border impractical, then you are allowed to not have one.

Next, the callers point was his INTERPRETATION of the legislation. No more than that. We can put technology in place to monitor the activity even if we don't have any infrastructure.

You really should try to understand what you are posting first.

To be fair the caller had bags of experience, more than anyone in here I would imagine and Farage had no answer either so I will always tend to listen to someone like that, I don't think he had an agenda either.
This technology, is it the technology that hasn't been invented yet?
Genuine question because I know there is some sort of tech we would need but not sure if that is it.

 

[The Clamp]

One more time - this is what you voted for.

I accept completely that it isn't what you thought you were voting for, but maybe if you had given it a little more thought before you voted, you would have seen that this is exactly what was most likely to happen with a leave vote. If you really think that there was some sort of 'ideal' solution somewhere between the two we are left with, then you really are in fantasyland.

I can understand you being taken in by Nige, Boris and co, but it is this complete reluctance to accept any responsibility for what you've done that pisses me off. FFS grow a pair and take responsibility for what you've done. This constant whining of 'it wasn't my fault' is truly pathetic .

Pow. Leavers OWNED. Excellent post.

 

[larus]

What technology?

Beat me to it. The word 'technology' is a bit on the vague side.
What we can do, maybe, perhaps, could, what I think will happen is, possibly etc etc...Its all a bit vague really.

To be fair the caller had bags of experience, more than anyone in here I would imagine and Farage had no answer either so I will always tend to listen to someone like that, I don't think he had an agenda either.
This technology, is it the technology that hasn't been invented yet?
Genuine question because I know there is some sort of tech we would need but not sure if that is it.

What the guy was saying was there would have to be another referendum as we would not be able to negotiate trade deals as it would be in breach of WTO rules. This was based on his interpretation of the legislation passed in the HoC - that there could not be anything new done on the border. He is interpreting the legislation as saying that we cannot have any new technology to record the activity, but this is clearly not the aim of the legislation. The legislation passed was to ensure there was no restrictions on trade which could undermine the GFA, not that the trade is not recorded by some other method. You are trying to confuse the physical border with a system of reporting trade activity.

In regards technology used on trade between the UK and ROI, how do you think VAT and Export/Import function for companies trading with the ROI? Oh, and BTW, I do have first-hand experience of this as I have both worked in ROI and employed someone as a sub-contractor from the ROI in my own company. Companies have to declare their exports/imports (EC Sales). That is how the current situation works with the over-the-border trade. This would be the basis for the future - based on mutual recognition of standards.

I'm not saying he was a liar about dealing in trade negotiations - I dispute his interpretation of the UK legislation as this is clearly not what the legislation is for.

 

[larus]

Pow. Leavers OWNED. Excellent post.

No, he slunk off with his tail between his legs.

This is what I asked him. Let's see if you can answer the question without deflecting onto the usual "This is what you voted for" immature response.


Tell me, who on the Leave side has been actively involved in the negotiations with the EU?

David Davis was marginalised by TM telling the EU to deal with Olly Robbins, so you can’t say him.

Let me give you a clue as to who has been the architects of the policy,
1 Teresa the appeaser.
2 Spreadsheet Phil. We’ll prepare for No Deal when we need to. Doh, great plan you dickhead.
3. Olly Robbins. A civil servant who has been TMs sidekick since the home office.

So rather than the usual remainer retort of “You leavers f*cked it up”, please tell me who has been running the negotiations and which side there were (are) on.

 

[The Clamp]

What the guy was saying was there would have to be another referendum as we would not be able to negotiate trade deals as it would be in breach of WTO rules. This was based on his interpretation of the legislation passed in the HoC - that there could not be anything new done on the border. He is interpreting the legislation as saying that we cannot have any new technology to record the activity, but this is clearly not the aim of the legislation. The legislation passed was to ensure there was no restrictions on trade which could undermine the GFA, not that the trade is not recorded by some other method. You are trying to confuse the physical border with a system of reporting trade activity.

In regards technology used on trade between the UK and ROI, how do you think VAT and Export/Import function for companies trading with the ROI? Oh, and BTW, I do have first-hand experience of this as I have both worked in ROI and employed someone as a sub-contractor from the ROI in my own company. Companies have to declare their exports/imports (EC Sales). That is how the current situation works with the over-the-border trade. This would be the basis for the future - based on mutual recognition of standards.

I'm not saying he was a liar about dealing in trade negotiations - I dispute his interpretation of the UK legislation as this is clearly not what the legislation is for.

You really are a ****ing idiot.

 

[The Clamp]

No, he slunk off with his tail between his legs.

This is what I asked him. Let's see if you can answer the question without deflecting onto the usual "This is what you voted for" immature response.


Tell me, who on the Leave side has been actively involved in the negotiations with the EU?

David Davis was marginalised by TM telling the EU to deal with Olly Robbins, so you can’t say him.

Let me give you a clue as to who has been the architects of the policy,
1 Teresa the appeaser.
2 Spreadsheet Phil. We’ll prepare for No Deal when we need to. Doh, great plan you dickhead.
3. Olly Robbins. A civil servant who has been TMs sidekick since the home office.

So rather than the usual remainer retort of “You leavers f*cked it up”, please tell me who has been running the negotiations and which side there were (are) on.

One thing us remainers did accurately predict was that Leavers would blame everyone and everything but themselves. You're all so sadly predictable. Ugh.

 

[larus]

You really are a ****ing idiot.

Hmm, and you were the person who was saying about abuse recently eh!

You wonder why people have a go at you!

 

[bluenitsuj]

One thing us remainers did accurately predict was that Leavers would blame everyone and everything but themselves. You're all so sadly predictable. Ugh.

In your opinion

 

[larus]

One thing us remainers did accurately predict was that Leavers would blame everyone and everything but themselves. You're all so sadly predictable. Ugh.

Again, the usual deflection. You're obviously too stupid to answer the question. Really, why do you bother when you are clearly mentally challenged?

 

[The Clamp]

Hmm, and you were the person who was saying about abuse recently eh!

You wonder why people have a go at you!

As I've said before. I don't, in any way whatsoever wonder why your mob have a go at me. I know exactly why you do. And so do you. Keep up the good work, ya wee dafty.