dick dasterdly

6 hours ago, AlexRich said:

 

I think we might see that referendum before we leave. If Boris Johnson becomes leader nothing really changes in parliament. If he wants to go for a "no deal" exit there will be a vote of no confidence in his Government (called by the Labour Party) and some of his fellow Conservatives will vote against him. That would mean a General Election, and with the new Brexit Party stealing traditional Tory votes he knows he will lose. His only real option will be to re-run the vote based on remain vs no deal exit. I think he'll take that gamble. 

I too think that it is more than likely that MPs will decide to gamble on another referendum.

What other choice do they have?

They know that revoking article 50 is likely to be political suicide at the next GE/they're not prepared to support leaving with no deal/the eu has said that it is not prepared to move on the laughable May/eu 'deal'.

16 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 I asked the question several times in attempts to get someone on the Brexit side to answer; with no success.

 

The last time I asked the question you finally responded with the same excuse as above; that you had previously answered the question and were not going to do so again.

 

Oddly, though, you had not answered it in any of the topics in which I asked it!

 

I explained that as I have a family, life and job I simply do not have the time to sit through every pots in every Brexit topic so i asked you if you would be kind enough to say in which topic your answer was, as it was not in any which I had posted in.

 

You ignored me.

 

It is not that I don't like your answer, it is that I have never seen it; because you refused to show it to me!

 

Yes, you have mentioned the backstop before; the only time you actually responded directly to my question. Yes, the UK would have to remain in the customs union until that issue was resolved to both sides satisfaction. But just the customs union and it's regulations; we would leave the rest.

 

But how would you resolve the Irish border problem?

 

Infuriate the Republican minority by closing the border and so breaking the Good Friday Agreement?

Or

Infuriate the Unionist majority by at best placing a hard customs border between that part of the UK and the rest; or worse forcing Northern Ireland into leaving the UK completely and becoming part of the Republic against the will of the majority? Surely not; I thought you believed in Democracy!

 

You may now say that all this is academic following May's resignation. You'd be wrong. 

 

Whoever takes over from her will have to come up with a new deal which is acceptable to both the EU and Parliament, persuade Parliament to accept this deal or persuade Parliament to commit the UK to economic suicide by leaving with no deal.

 

 

"The last time I asked the question you finally responded with the same excuse as above; that you had previously answered the question and were not going to do so again."

"It is not that I don't like your answer, it is that I have never seen it; because you refused to show it to me!"

"Yes, you have mentioned the backstop before; the only time you actually responded directly to my question."

I'm tired of your continual protestations that nobody has ever answered your question re the eu/may 'deal' being BRINO, particularly as the above quotes from your post show that you are being economical with the truth.  i.e. You at least admit in the last quote that I responded to your question, whereas the other 2 quotes state that I didn't.....

I can recall one thread in particular (although not the title of the thread) where there were quite a few comments from posters in direct response to your question.

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I'm not sure on what basis that is the truth.

 

Older and wiser is not a guarantee and your broad assumptions about what lay behind the decisions of millions of people is just that, broad assumption.

 

I'm inclined to partly agree.

But bear in mind that the 'youngsters' have absolutely no experience of life, or knowledge of how things worked pre eu.

You can pretty much guarantee that many of them are still worried about how leaving the eu will affect their holidays ☹️.

Can't say I'm a boris fan, but I hope that if he is elected by the tory party he delivers on this statement:

"We will leave the EU on Oct. 31, deal or no deal."

Of course there is always the possibility that he will subvert this in the same way as May...... (i.e. BRINO) ☹️

Confrontation with the eu is exactly what is needed IMO, and should have been done 3 years ago!

Instead, our politicians preferred to look towards their own financial interests - and so agreed to the eu's agenda.

We can all see the result ☹️.

17 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

How about game permits to hunt poachers.

 

Of course they might shoot back.

Better yet, allow game permits for hunters to hunt each other ????.

I feel very slightly (and I mean very slightly) sorry for poachers, who are likely to be extremely poor (?), whereas I have no sympathy whatsoever for those who want to kill for 'the thrill'......

If they find it thrilling to kill, then surely they would be in paradise hunting people with the same weapons as themselves?

18 hours ago, nontabury said:

 

 

 The owners of British steel were given a very generous loan three years ago, in order to keep the business afloat. This was before The people’s referendum, when the people Democratically voted to leave this so called union.

 Forward to 2019, and again the company is in financial difficulties, due to a number of reasons, competition from China and other low wage economies. E.u regulations that seem to stop the British government from supporting our industries, but strangely does not stop E.u countries such as Germany,Belgium and France.

 

On the topic of economics, what does a leading Germans economic expert think about the U.K’s prospect after we leave.

 

 

 

"E.u regulations that seem to stop the British government from supporting our industries, but strangely does not stop E.u countries such as Germany,Belgium and France."

I apologise in advance if this has already been asked and answered (I'm working my way through the numerous posts since my last visit yesterday!), but do you have any evidence to support this claim?

56 minutes ago, Emdog said:

I think espionage includes potential death penalty, which would give UK and Sweden a valid reason not to extradite to US.

I think (but don't know) that the US just has to take the death penalty 'off the table' to enable extradition?

10 hours ago, 7by7 said:

I have asked you, and others, many, many times before why you consider May's deal to be BRINO, what it is you find so bad about it; but as you all always dodged the question by utilising petty sloganising I gave up asking it.

 

But I'll try again.

 

Under May's original deal we would leave the CAP; don't you want that?

 

We would leave the CFP; don't you want that?

 

We would leave the customs union; don't you want that?

 

We would leave the FoM directive and the other three freedoms; don't you want that?

 

We would leave the jurisdiction of the ECJ; don't you want that?

 

Maybe it's the guarantee of the rights of EU nationals currently living in the UK that you don't like? Remember though, this also guarantees the rights of UK nationals currently living in the other 27; don't you want that?

 

Maybe it's the agreement to honour our financial commitments made before the referendum that you don't like? OK, to those who rely on slogans and lies (Boris) this is a major stumbling block. Personally, I believe in honouring agreements and commitments already made. If we don't, how can we make trade agreements with anyone post Brexit? Who would trust us?

 

That leaves the Irish backstop, whatever it turns out to be. Some Brexiteers say the people of Northern Ireland should be forced into leaving the UK and joining the RoI. Surely not you, though; aren't you a believer in democracy?

 

I've been away, and have missed many posts, didn't have time to read them all before that either, but I am assuming you are not so stupid as to believe no deal and joining Mauritania in becoming the second country to trade purely on WTO terms to be a viable option.

 

So, what is your alternative to May's deal?

 

Other Brexiteers, feel free to answer as well.

Yes, you have asked the question previously - and it was answered previously by myself and others.  Just because you didn't like/agree with the answers doesn't mean it wasn't answered!

I can't be bothered to trawl back through the hundreds of pages of existing and earlier brexit threads to prove this, so without going to the effort (yet again) of pointing out all the reasons why the may/eu deal is BRINO - one quick example (and probably the most immediately obvious) is that the eu has to agree to release the uk from the 'backstop arrangements'.  And, (IIRC) everything stays the same until then.

Just now, david555 said:

Probably Farage  pension is a part of it + all the other British E.U. parliament members/ staff  pensions good-by premiums + running commitment where U.K. signed contract for …. , compare it with ANY contract breach or commitment in real life ….especially in a divorce case....

I'm still at a loss as to why so many posters don't understand that once someone leaves the club/employment terminated - the pension contributions are put on hold and invested.  The previous employer doesn't continue paying!

30 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Sorry, but whoever posts their flag atop Mt Moral Highground first gets to claim it for all eternity.

11 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I never claimed that you were insulting anyone, but my comment was more aimed at the broad brush tactic of both sides of any polarised online argument to portray the opponent as being insulting over any minor comment, thus elevating their own position. 

Your initial post above was clearly directed at me....  Please don't try to wriggle out of it.

Not that I care much, as it just shows how desperate remainers are to insult those with a different POV ☹️

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Sorry, but whoever posts their flag atop Mt Moral Highground first gets to claim it for all eternity.

Really?

Please show me where I've been deliberately insulting to those with a different opinion.

To be fair, I may (rarely) have been mildly insulting from time to time - but nothing like the remainers on this forum!

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Nauseous asked who benefits, I gave Farage as a ‘for a start’ example.

 

It is neither an exhaustive example, nor does it exclude others.

 

I hope this isn’t turning into a comprehension class for those who can’t keep up.

And these type of exchanges are why so many are giving up on posting their opinion nowadays as so many posters prefer to rely on insulting others with a different opinion, rather than genuinely discussing the issue ☹️.

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

This has been explained multiple times here on TVF since this Brexit crock started.

 

In case you missed it, here’s a very good explanation:

 

https://qz.com/1134703/brexit-divorce-bill-explained-why-the-uk-needs-to-pay-the-eu-to-leave/

 

[edit] 

 

This particular paragraph answers your specific question:

 

“Britain signed up to the EU’s budget framework when it became a member; budgets are not calculated year by year. The EU budget is a “legal act” and is over a seven year span. The last one started in 2014 and it ends in 2020. So, when Britain leaves the EU—tentatively set for March, 2019—it will still be liable to pay its share for the remaining seven quarters—from April 2019 until the end of 2020.“

Precisely - and I'm very glad that you've pointed this out.

The uk had to pay for their commitments until the end of the budget period - 2020.  And yet the 39bn equates to more than 4 years of payments!