.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Thaiwine
-
Posts
472 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Thaiwine
-
-
What I think has happened in this EU referendum as I consider the events that have unfolded, DC fearing the progress that Ukip were making in the run up to the Election goes for what he thinks will bring those supporters back that are starting to worry about migration, so he says if you vote for us we will give you a referendum on the EU, he was confident that even the threat of leaving the EU would have the Brussels bureaucrats eating out of his hand, he would return a hero the saviour of the UK, so what went wrong? We do not know what happened behind closed doors but we can make a reasonable guess, after a couple of sessions of water boarding he realised just how badly he had goofed, and a plan was evolved on the best way forward, he would return with some wishy washy concessions to reflect how angry our masters were, he was to make the people understand how catastrophic leaving would be and during the run up to the referendum they would arrange for press releases from the top financial institutions to back up his campaign.
-
Even if what Robert Azevedo is stating is unbiast and correct (which I don't belive to be the case) that the UK would have to pay 9 billion per year in tariffs we would be no worse off than we are now should we leave the EU as we pay that much if not more to the EU already.
These EU contributions are going to have to stretch a long way. Boris Johnson first promised the NHS and now he is proposing to use them to remove VAT on energy. Its like the pot of gold will cure all.
First of all I apologise for cutting out some of your replies, as I keep getting an error of too many posts or something like that.
So if we pay tariffs on exports, we will then charge tariffs on imports, so would Robert Azevedo's 'estimate' be on only exports? which I suspect to be the case, if so it would be offset by the tariffs on imports?
If I have understand that correctly then no his comment was not unbiast and correct it would be one sided to say the least.
-
Forbes opinion on ex wto boss's comment brexit would be a blow to UK.(not ex, you mean current World Trade Organization chief Roberto Azevedo)
All very confusing.and misleading.
"Thus, we cannot have the two claims being made here. Both that Britain will not be a WTO member and also that Britain will be bound by WTO rules. We will thus be entirely free to set whatever import duties we desire. And as the only rational trade policy is one of unilateral free trade those duties should be set at a level of zero. Which, as Patrick Minford keeps pointing out, will make the UK economy grow by 3% or so."
The UK has effectively been a member of the WTO since 1948, initially one of the founding countries in GATT(General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) which was replaced by the WTO in 1995. All EU member states and the EU in its own right are full members of the WTO. The problem is that all EU member states share the tariff profile of the EU so in the event of a Brexit, the UK would have to establish a new tariff profile in order to maintain its membership. Any new tariff profile would subject to WTO rules and you cannot be a member without a tariff profile. It would be virtually impossible for the UK to trade as a non WTO member, currently 162 members..
"At the heart of the system — known as the multilateral trading system — are the WTO’s agreements, negotiated and signed by a large majority of the world’s trading nations, and ratified in their parliaments. These agreements are the legal ground-rules for international commerce. Essentially, they are contracts, guaranteeing member countries important trade rights. They also bind governments to keep their trade policies within agreed limits to everybody’s benefit."
Thanks for the well reasoned response
The trouble is, there is so much biased half truths and lies spouted in the media it makes it difficult to decide where the truth if any lies in any given topic.
Very true, but one thing you can take as fact is that there is no tariff profile for the United Kingdom in the WTO database, only for the European Union and all the other member countries.
The European Union and the WTO
This page gathers key information on the European Union’s participation in the WTO. The European Union (until 30 November 2009 known officially in the WTO as the European Communities for legal reasons) (more info) has been a WTO member since 1 January 1995. The 28 member States of the EU are also WTO members in their own right. The EU is a single customs union with a single trade policy and tariff. The European Commission — the EU’s executive arm — speaks for all EU member States at almost all WTO meetings.
https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/european_communities_e.htm
Even if what Robert Azevedo is stating is unbiast and correct (which I don't belive to be the case) that the UK would have to pay 9 billion per year in tariffs we would be no worse off than we are now should we leave the EU as we pay that much if not more to the EU already.
-
In my opinion the peace has been kept for several reasons ,
one being it's not good for your economy to destroy your customers ability to buy your goods and services.
I do not see global style warfare in other continents that are not politicaly bound at the hip.
What on earth are you talking about? Kindly explain
erm don't kill your customers you will go hungry
-
In my opinion the peace has been kept for several reasons ,
one being it's not good for your economy to destroy your customers ability to buy your goods and services.
I do not see global style warfare in other continents that are not politicaly bound at the hip.
-
A nursery school teacher was observing her classroom of children while they were drawing. She would occasionally walk around to see each child's work.
As she got to little Sarah who was working diligently, she asked what the drawing was. Sarah replied, "I'm drawing God." The teacher paused and said, "But no one knows what God looks like."
Sarah replied, "They will in a minute"-
2
-
-
I see the knives are now out for 'call me Dave'
Personally I agree his project fear was the wrong way to present the remain case.
-
Forbes opinion on ex wto boss's comment brexit would be a blow to UK.(not ex, you mean current World Trade Organization chief Roberto Azevedo)
All very confusing.and misleading.
"Thus, we cannot have the two claims being made here. Both that Britain will not be a WTO member and also that Britain will be bound by WTO rules. We will thus be entirely free to set whatever import duties we desire. And as the only rational trade policy is one of unilateral free trade those duties should be set at a level of zero. Which, as Patrick Minford keeps pointing out, will make the UK economy grow by 3% or so."
The UK has effectively been a member of the WTO since 1948, initially one of the founding countries in GATT(General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) which was replaced by the WTO in 1995. All EU member states and the EU in its own right are full members of the WTO. The problem is that all EU member states share the tariff profile of the EU so in the event of a Brexit, the UK would have to establish a new tariff profile in order to maintain its membership. Any new tariff profile would subject to WTO rules and you cannot be a member without a tariff profile. It would be virtually impossible for the UK to trade as a non WTO member, currently 162 members..
"At the heart of the system — known as the multilateral trading system — are the WTO’s agreements, negotiated and signed by a large majority of the world’s trading nations, and ratified in their parliaments. These agreements are the legal ground-rules for international commerce. Essentially, they are contracts, guaranteeing member countries important trade rights. They also bind governments to keep their trade policies within agreed limits to everybody’s benefit."
Thanks for the well reasoned response
The trouble is, there is so much biased half truths and lies spouted in the media it makes it difficult to decide where the truth if any lies in any given topic.
-
Forbes opinion on ex wto boss's comment brexit would be a blow to UK.
-
I'm not sure but maybe there's still some animosity over Turkeys invasion of Cyprus, so it's a question of your enemy is my enemy lets be friends.
-
Yeah you are right laddie
You don't have anything good for EU
Is there something the world would need from UK?
I'm guessing that was aimed at me,
It seems a strange question you could say the same about any country in the world, is there something the world needs from them?
Also on the contrary not everything was bad from the EU, please don't ask me to name them
but I'm sure there must be some. -
Gaddaffi was behind at least two civillian airline bombings killing 441 people, maybe other terrorist attacks too.
While Nato helped to destroy his army on the pretext of saving civilian lives, the revolution was already under way,
He had a rich country, if he had shared it's wealth with the population maybe he would still be there, loved by them.
Many in the UK (including a doctor, the father of one of the victims), think that Libya/Al-Magrahi/Ghadaffi had absolutely nothing to do with the Pan-Am/Lockerbie bombing.
Much more likely the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
Syria, who had backed that organisation, had come "onside" in the first Gulf War, so it was the fault of the international "bogey-man", Ghadaffi/Libya.
Of course it's possible, who knows what to belive these days with all the subterfuge in the world by governments.
I'm sure they have been and still are playing behind the scenes feeding the public their propaganda.
A bit more from the media http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/7181993/300-IRA-terror-victims-set-for-compensation-from-Libya.html
-
I just watched this vid presented by Andrea Leadsom the minister for energy,
She answered some of my questions even the point of passporting by the city banks.
-
Nontabury, I have to ask you this, why are you so vehemently against anything in favour of the EU?
Most here have gone out of there way to explain that their decision to be pro or anti EU is a balanced, rational one.
You're a Yorkshireman right?
Is there really nothing you think the EU has done that's of any use whatsoever?
How about the banning of mass use of antibiotics by farmers to fatten livestock unlike in the USA? Good?
Your arguments would carry more weight if you showed more balance!
And before you go off on one I've already expressed my concern about the democratic deficit in the EU and the lamentable border force in the UK ?
He's not capable. He takes pride in sticking to his vexatious fixed positions. You are wasting your time engaging with him.
He's the type that posts images such as the one just above putting words into the mouths of British soldiers in the trenches - thinking that cheap, deranged photoshopping supports his argument. He'll now be sitting in front of his PC thinking that he's oh, so clever. So lets go back to the OP -
Ask this question of the Allied troops in the trenches -
Would you vote for a political and economic union that brought peace to Europe?
1. Yes.
2. No.
It would be a 99.1% yes vote.
The 0.9% no vote would be a bunch of vexatious Yorkshiremen who'd rather fight to the death than admit they are wrong.
It would seem presumptuous to speak for 5.7 million people who can't be asked.
-
I don't see how Greece can negotiate anything, surely thats the job of the EU masters.
And it's Nato/EU being pushy that should back off before they start something, or maybe thats the plan?
-
Gaddaffi was behind at least two civillian airline bombings killing 441 people, maybe other terrorist attacks too.
While Nato helped to destroy his army on the pretext of saving civilian lives, the revolution was already under way,
He had a rich country, if he had shared it's wealth with the population maybe he would still be there, loved by them.
yeah but during his reign there were no ISIS and other terrorist groups, Libya was the richest country of Africa, take a look at Libya today are you happy with it ?, Saddam maybe a brutal dictator but Iraq was at peace too and the same goes for Assad.
75% of Libya s population supported Qadafi just a few minority who were sponsored by NATO, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, the way you see Syria today.
Yes Gaddaffi ran a tight ship with his spy network, I think you are right in that Libya now would still be a stable country were he still there. And I think we were wrong to go into Iraq making the mess there, just why we did I don't know, perhaps we never will know, for sure it wasn't about WMD. I can't help thinking that if these people ruled for the people instead of for themselves these countries would be better places now.
-
Gaddaffi was behind at least two civillian airline bombings killing 441 people, maybe other terrorist attacks too.
While Nato helped to destroy his army on the pretext of saving civilian lives, the revolution was already under way,
He had a rich country, if he had shared it's wealth with the population maybe he would still be there, loved by them.
-
Anyone know if there's any truth in this:
My first thought on this was that it has to be a forgery, surley no one would be stupid enough to write down that they would be commiting treason to the state even if that was the plan, having googled it, it seem it is in fact genuine, back as far as 1960 when Edward Heath was in charge of negotiations with the EEC he knew that in fact giving sovereignty to the EU, was an act of treason, he spun this as sharing sovereignty, later asked why he decieved the public on the issue he said the public was to stupid to make the right decision, ring any bells?
-
Anyone know if there's any truth in this:
-
You guys seen this vid yet ? BBC Four
Peter Hitchens gives us a short history lesson of our EU membership.
It's about one hour long.
-
I'm in the UK, what strikes me as I drive around the city I live in, is that there are no posters car stickers billboard adverts that I have seen, it's very much like it's not happening.
I don't watch the telly so can't comment about that.
-
In arguing for leniency, defense attorney Bobbi Sternheim said Pham might have no country to return to after he finished his prison term since his citizenship in the United Kingdom was taken away.
We are consistantly told this cannot be done, to take away someones citizenship, giving them nowhere to go,
That is part of the argument regarding we are not allowed to stop people coming back who have gone off to the middle east to fight.
-
Even the BBC is saying the remain side is telling porkies
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36397732
They also questions Brexit claim of 50 million daily
-
Remain can't make up their mind, either we are insignificant and need europe to survive or we will destroy the world.
Project fear still going strong.
but I'm sure there must be some.
SURVEY: Brexit, do you support it?
in World News
Posted
It seems to me you can use data to support your own argument should you do a bit of research.
ie; I claim Margaret Thatchers resignation as PM caused a 20% loss in house prices over the next 5 years, Nationwide stats prove me right.