.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Thaiwine
-
Posts
472 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Thaiwine
-
-
If the US tells us to "walk back", then thats what we will do, we have been the US's poodle since the end of WW2.
So, we have stalemate, no informal discussions (EU) and no article 50 before discussions (UK), is this now limboBrexit?
The government will say Brexit will cause too much harm to the economy and we will leave the option of leaving with the mandate in the future.
The whole thing will be a fudge, loss of face and a complete waste of time. Boris or May won't invoke article 50, just like Cameron didn't, but he promise to, he squirmed out of that, no one will have balls to do it just in case we get a worse deal.
Checkmate...
That does not seem to be the noise coming out of Washington
http://www.speaker.gov/general/speaker-ryan-calls-free-trade-agreement-uk-after-brexit
-
The media blame Nigel Farage, now the knives are out
No wonder he wanted to increase security
-
But then on the bright side I have just seen this
http://heatst.com/uk/11-countries-gearing-up-to-strike-trade-deals-with-britain/
See we don't need the EU it's only about one week
-
I don't think it was his job to point out vote leave was not being honest, after all they were both after the same goal as was labour leave, it was his job as well as vote leave and labour leave to point out remain's miss information.
After all this is politics, smoke and mirrors.
-
It was on vote leaves bus not his Ukip bus was purple, vote leave bus was red
Like I said vote leave side lined Ukip and would have nothing to do with them it was actually vote leave that used Nigel Farage letting him do their dirty work on immigration
-
I'm not a big fan of Farage but I did enjoy this:
Well I liked you post as I too enjoyed his speach,
However I do find him to be one of the most consistant and honest politicians I have seen, so I do actually like him, and his straight forward talking.
Very honest. Like backtracking on the 350 pounds per week for the NHS as soon as the vote was in. You have a very forgiving notion of honesty.
He never promised 350 mill to the NHS that was vote leave
Vote leave would have nothing to do with Nigel Farage
As regards Indy's video, Nigel Farage said he would like to see the money go to GP's NHS and something else I forget what (without going back to view again)
That's like me saying to you I would like the money to go to buy more tanks, but vote leave does not do that, it doesn't make me a liar.
Edit to add-- actually vote leave never promised it either they implied it, but thats not about Nigel Farage
-
I said to my daughter before voting that I expect a leave vote to bring about a recession of about two to three years, she said "don't worry dad we have had them before we will get through it we will come out ok" and she's right you know.
-
I thought he had done a u-turn as he was allways anti EU.
After the voting I realised he had indeed remained true to his past beliefs
He was a double agent
-
-
And this is why you cannot run a country with town-hall politics, f###ing wan##rs. A representative democracy means just that, you elect people who are specialists. When they abrogate that responsibility, and return to the people, you have a big problem.
The only thing the people who get voted for are specalised in is deceit, the civil servants are the guys who know what they are doing (supposedly) the boys in the suits are all mouth and no trousers.
-
I'm not a big fan of Farage but I did enjoy this:
Well I liked you post as I too enjoyed his speach,
However I do find him to be one of the most consistant and honest politicians I have seen, so I do actually like him, and his straight forward talking.
-
There seems to be some confusion ( I think from scots ) how British Democracy works, let me try and help you out
We have a general election where we the people vote MP's into office, these ELECTED MP's then ELECT a prime minister from one of the ELECTED MP's
so you will see our prime minister is ELECTED not once but twice, the prime minister then appoints cabinet ministers from the ELECTED MP's
So now you see ALL our MP's are ELECTED into office by we the people.
You are mistaken the PM is never elected he is appointed on the basis that being the leader of the majority party he can command a Commons majority. He is not elected by MPs in fact the wider Conservative Party membership will vote on who gets to be the new Conservative leader. Normally the Conservative Party in Parliament would accept that result and support the new leader but there would be nothing stopping those same MPs from refusing to support his program and he would then be forced to ask for a dissolution's unless some other person could command majority support and the process would begin again. We had a general election and the people gave that majority and mandate to Cameron. Now he has resigned and we are about to get a new PM and a new government that will take far reaching decisions without first seeking a new mandate approving those decisions.
Its amazing that the very people who complain about the Brussels bureaucracy haven't got the first idea of how their own operates.
The best I can find is wiki about party leader
"It is thus typical in such states (e.g., in the Westminster system) for the party leader to seek election to the legislature and, if elected, to simultaneously serve as the party's parlimentary leader"
so my point stands that the PM gets elected twice, once by his peers and once by the electorate in his constituency.
-
Deleted post
woops posted in wrong thread
-
On the point of what happens if there is a general election, and no one has invoked artical 50
Well 50% of the electorate will be pi$$ed off, while 50% will be ecstatic
with a voting electorate of 45,325,100 (2014 stats) giving a turnout of 70%
So guessing cons, lab, libs,Ukip field all seats, none wanting to invoke article 50 except Ukip
I can see Ukip getting maybe 40% of the vote, which would give them 12,691 028 votes
Last Election Conservative won a majority with 11,334,576 votes
We could see a Ukip government that would issue article 50 and maybe more, do we want that?
-
There seems to be some confusion ( I think from scots ) how British Democracy works, let me try and help you out
We have a general election where we the people vote MP's into office, these ELECTED MP's then ELECT a prime minister from one of the ELECTED MP's
so you will see our prime minister is ELECTED not once but twice, the prime minister then appoints cabinet ministers from the ELECTED MP's
So now you see ALL our MP's are ELECTED into office by we the people.
-
There are some complex decisions that are simply beyond the capabilities of the majority of the general public to make, they are just not equipped to make them, the Eu referendum is one, decisions regarding democracy is another.
That old chestnut.. protect the people from themselves from your ivory palace.
Kurt
Not quite, it's the decision making abilities of people such as these that many people need protection from:
(Thanks MJP for the link)
I ask you, how can you possibly put a decision such as Eu membership in the hands of people like her and the millions of others like her.
She needs to dump her boyfriend, such a nice guy baiting her and then putting the video on the net for all to mock her
And you seem to be implying that 17+million UK voters are like her, which goes to show your level of intelligence.
-
I've been looking at the various options that might be available in trade deals with EU. I thought I'd better do this, as nobody can really advise. Most of all the Brexiters themselves!!!
What strikes me immediately is that UK and EU are interdependent. This is important when considering the issue of tariffs, which are taxes levied on exports by the receiving country. The danger of imposing tariffs is that they get reciprocated. Thus if, say, the EU imposed a 30% tariff on UK car exports to the EU, then UK would likely impose a similar rate, or higher, on EU export of cars to the UK. Trade would be damaged all round. This would be particularly problematic for the German car industry which exports as much as 10% of its production to UK, and has a business interest in 50% of the very big UK car industry. This example might stand good for any number of sectors.
Contrary to popular belief UK most certainly does not have a whip hand in negotiations with the EU: simply because Britain needs an agreement more than the EU does. It's just a matter of size you see. Thus while EU benefits by being a net gainer in EU vs UK trade by a whopping 40 billion, this still represents a small percentage in EU terms, whereas 46% of UK exports go to the EU.
One other observation is that multi nationals would also have a big say. And they carry weight. To go back to the car example. BMW would be livid with both the UK and German Government if they hindered trade. It would be the same other big companies, hundreds of medium size companies, and tens of thousands of small businesses.
The WTO model. Quite simply no rules or agreement as such, but a right to trade. Things just kind of do or don't develop. These might include tariffs, but read as above as to why they might not be imposed, or may be low. It's a simple model and most importantly does not require negotiation. And means UK is free to negotiate with countries outside the EU free from EU regulations. It would also make a withdrawal from the EU much simpler and without conditions.
The 'Swiss' Model. A series of bilateral agreements, which may not be offered anymore as they took years to negotiate and were a nightmare; rather has the hallmarks of its parents then I would say.
The Norway Model. Single market model. This gives full access to the single market. Britain would join the European Free Trade Association. UK would need to make high contributions as now. Additionally it would have to agree to the free movement of labour. And adhere to EU specifications, eg, a size 1 egg must be such and such a height and weight. In return there is free trade for both parties. Crucially, it is granted by EU and can not be demanded. But there are significant advantages for EU too; an offer they would be mad to refuse in all honesty.
One of the UK's big cards is the city of London. Contrary to popular belief (including mine until very recently) it would not be decimated, in fact EU needs it. It is more than just access, UK has the best hard and soft infrastructure, expertise, an established customer base (the world basically) and every country needs to be there. Once again then there is a degree of interdependence only this time roles are reversed. EU could deny the UK so called 'financial passporting', but this is easily circumnavigated, and would undoubtedly result in harsh retribution.
Overall, it is 'I scratch your back if you scratch mine'. And the demands of commerce would likely ensure a mutually satisfactory solution in my opinion.
I read this article earlier and was quite angry at the obvious betrayal of the British electorate, however I can see the sense of trying to find a half way house a little for everyone, ie, we stay in europe which keeps the scots happy for the minute, we would get our fishing grounds back, which would prob.. go to Scotland as a sweetner, we get soverignty back, we have freedom of movement, we will pay money to EU for free trade. loser NHS
Boris seems to be going for the Norway model.
-
European SUPERSTATE to be unveiled: EU nations 'to be morphed into one' post-Brexit
http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/683739/EU-referendum-German-French-European-superstate-Brexit
I don't know if his is posted elsewhere I have just seen it.
I believe this is the long term goal of the EU but I can't believe the timing. Are they so out of touch with what's happening all over Europe? Then again, sitting in their cushy offices in Brussels, that's not surprising.
If I understood correctly the EU internal politics, UK has not wanted to deepen the EU co-operation.
Now, when UK is out of the picture, the EU can go forward with further integration and implement logical changes to it's structure. This could mean common foreign policy (which is almost in place already), common military etc. Basically this is one way for EU and member states to save money as there would no longer be duplicate resources in place. For some tasks it makes sense to do it collectively.
For the timing.. sounds a bit like it's a one way to push UK out as soon as possible. Even if UK is still a member, it's likely it is no longer invited to talks about EU's future.
The whole time UK is a hang-around member, it will still be paying fees to the EU. During this time, the collective money could be spent for EU's future plans. Thus it's beneficial for UK to exit as soon as possible.
So this is a win-win for both EU and Brexiters.
I agree with your first sentence completely.
However, this sentiment is not exclusively to the UK. There are very strong far right parties in the other countries (France, Netherlands, Austria, Hungary etc) that are not 100% keen on handing over full control and total integration. Brexit would undoubtedly give courage to some of them and I won't be surprised if there aren't more referendums over the coming months.
I agree also that the UK will not be involved in talks about EU's future - it would not make sense, naturally.
UK would continue to pay fees to the EU in order to enjoy the free market status. But I hope she will also start to put their foot down on some other issues that is not in her interests - agriculture, fisheries, military, immigration etc
Zero Hedge not everyone likes (Naam) but they have an article about more Countries that want a referendum
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-26/civil-uprising-escalates-8th-eu-nation-threatens-referendum
-
^^ to Naam
The problem here is Politicians took Britain in to the EEC on Jan 1st 1973 without asking the people, we then had a referendum in 1975 on whether or not to remain
Which rises the question did joining the EEC cause the recesion?
-
European SUPERSTATE to be unveiled: EU nations 'to be morphed into one' post-Brexit
http://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/683739/EU-referendum-German-French-European-superstate-Brexit
I don't know if his is posted elsewhere I have just seen it.
-
Plus -
Anyone that thinks the effects of Brexit have already been absorbed is wired to the moon.
The markets were in a state of shock on Friday.
The true run on the market will arrive in the next few weeks when the bad news starts to pour out of Brussels.
And it will all be bad news as it's not in the EU's interests to make life easy on us.
Vengeance will be theirs.
Or maybe thats just what yiu want to see happen
Quote "And it will all be bad news as it's not in the EU's interests to make life easy on us." end of quote
This is not what A Merkel has said so far, so we can only wait and see
But it's more fun to smread rumors and try and inflame the situation?
The delusion of the LEAVE side is astounding.
The last thing the EU wants or needs is anyone else heading for the exit.
To ensure that won't happen, they will put the boot right into the UK.
As a warning to other nations.
It's already been accepted that by the LEAVE side that free movement of labour will be a precondition of any future trade agreement.
So once again, I ask the LEAVE side -
What was the point of this referendum if it were not to prevent immigration? and now you are being told that it will not prevent European immigration -
How do you feel about that?
Conned????
I can only speak for myself and no I don't feel conned, the word is Betrayed.
I think that Ukip will be doing a lot better come the next general election which will be unfortunate as it will promote the far right.
-
Are you all transfering your GBP into Baht on a daily basis? no read on
So you haven't lost anything until you do, why not start crying after you have.
-
Well it's begining to look like it doesn't matter as Boris is going to sell the leave side down the river
-
Plus -
Anyone that thinks the effects of Brexit have already been absorbed is wired to the moon.
The markets were in a state of shock on Friday.
The true run on the market will arrive in the next few weeks when the bad news starts to pour out of Brussels.
And it will all be bad news as it's not in the EU's interests to make life easy on us.
Vengeance will be theirs.
Or maybe thats just what yiu want to see happen
Quote "And it will all be bad news as it's not in the EU's interests to make life easy on us." end of quote
This is not what A Merkel has said so far, so we can only wait and see
But it's more fun to smread rumors and try and inflame the situation?
Even though we voted for it, a Brexit won't happen in the end. Here's why
in World News
Posted
And more good news Boeing has chosen Britain for it's new European headquarters even if we leave the EU
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3497621/Boeing-s-Brexit-boost-World-s-largest-aircraft-maker-picks-Britain-home-new-European-headquarters.html