dick dasterdly

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

The reason for the uptick being that there's been some renewed hope that Parliament can stop Brexit.

 Exactly. The money markets (and rating agencies) that had no problem with the events leading up to the '08 crash, are now determined (for the same reasons) that brexit must be stopped....

32 minutes ago, Ketyo said:

This no-deal Brexit is going to be entertaining ...   its going to be a lot of fun to watch...

I'd bet money that it won't happen - and I also wouldn't find the aftermath entertaining....

5 minutes ago, rhyddid said:

Now it Macron that made BS BJ place the foot there ? 
Brexit minds do not know what else excuse to find to support such man.

The true is that from the 31st October we will be in hands of such man who does not even how to seat properly, image how he will manage UK   !
 

Yet another non-brit that is determined to use any silly excuse to support their view....

Please read back, and understand how this 'photo became top news for remainers - despite the true story as to how it happened...

On 8/21/2019 at 9:37 PM, mommysboy said:

I bet the fatties won't go without.  They always get food somehow.

Presumably this is a general, pointless insult?

(And no, I'm not even close to overweight before anyone states that this is the reason for my post).....

34 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

Agreed. And UK could have played a big part in implementing those reforms if it decides to remain. Better standing inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in.

UK politicians are as corrupt as EU politicians.  It took the electorate to point this out - via the referendum.

37 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Not according to the BBC or some French newspapers.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49440952

 

But Sky News political correspondent Tom Rayner offered a different perspective on the incident, saying it was part of a good-humoured exchange.

Image Copyright @RaynerSkyNews@RAYNERSKYNEWS
Report
French media have made light of the incident, too.

"No, Boris Johnson did not insult France by putting his foot on the table in front of Emmanuel Macron," was the headline on a story by Le Parisien newspaper, which then outlines the light-hearted exchange between the two.

"Internet is quick to react - and sometimes overreact," it added.

The websites of the weekly L'Obs and FranceInfo radio similarly saw the funny side of the episode.

This has already been established - but of course some people are determined to use any excuse to vilify those they dislike ☹️.

24 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

It won't be parliament forcing remain it will be the people via a confirmatory vote.

 

If and when we decide to remain, the whole sorry episode will be quickly forgotten as we return to the status quo and get on with building a better future for our children.

 

If, God forbid, we did leave, we would be constantly reminded of what a terrible mistake we made, as we see the economy, employment and standards slowly descend to those of a 3rd world country.

I've no doubt you believe all of the above....

Personally, I'm equally sure that parliament forcing remain (whether it be by parliamentary measures, or another referendum with the options of 1) accept deal 2) remain) - will lead to simmering resentment for a long time to come.

But as I've said for a long time now - politicians clearly can't be trusted, so another referendum on whether to accept the  politicians 'deal' or leave with no deal is probably a good idea.

Unfortunately there is no time for this anymore, so we will have to wait until the Boris/EU deal (that I'm pretty sure will be accepted by parliament) - and then see the reaction of the electorate at the next GE.

1 hour ago, stephenterry said:

I have no issue in leaving the EU with a deal and a transitional period. That is the sensible course of action. And it could prompt both the UK and the EU to reevaluate how they interact going forward. Clearly, this needs much work on both sides to move successfully into the future. 

 

On the other hand, I do have an issue with a no-deal. Under no circumstances could I support a possible break up of the UK, and if a no deal occurred I would welcome the GE  - and a change of government- that would follow.

If the EU had any sense it would have realised that a multitude of reforms were needed - but instead they decided the best idea was to become even more obstinate.....

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Well the only comparison I can see is that Holland and the UK had referendums on the EU. The difference is the UK government have accepted the peoples decision where the Dutch government totally ignored it. Very democratic. I guess that's why you have mentioned the UK can revoke article 50. no thanks we believe in democracy.

 

Is that why you are so interested in the Brexit threads as you are a serial poster, although usually slating the UK and telling us all we have made a huge mistake.

 

I am glad you accept we are leaving. Because we are. Shame your country didn't have the backbone to do the same.

Whilst I agree about referendums that were against the EU having to be voted on again.... I'm not as confident as to the UK govt. genuinely accepting the referendum result....

IMO they're still looking for a BRINO agreement that they can sell to the electorate.

'Don't count your chickens until they've hatched' springs to mind ☹️.

1 hour ago, stephenterry said:

Back to the topic, which is yet another Brexit one. I would have hoped that responses would be few and far between, but now they're veering off course.

 

I believe Johnson wants a deal that would be agreed by parliament, but there's little doubt unless a solution to the backstop is found and approved by the EU, Johnson would be heading on a collision course with parliament.  

 

And that would see the end of his tenure as PM without a doubt. Why? Mainly because the prospect of a no-deal would be constitutionally unacceptable by parliament, and if he ignores that and pushes through a no-deal by hook or by crook, the ramifications would blow Britain apart.

 

Best of luck...

 

 

Why on earth would you think the responses be few and far between, bearing in mind even more posters from EU countries than the UK seem to be posting on these various brexit threads - and all the threads receive more than a few posts!  But I can understand that you were hoping this would be the case.....

But to respond to your main point, I do agree that the ramifications one way or another will be significant.

We disagree insofar as I think the ramifications of parliament forcing remain, will far outweigh the ramifications of actually leaving.

2 hours ago, <deleted> dasterdly said:

As always, it depends on one's perspective.

 

The "ridiculous" part is that it appears Boris is only looking for a slight re-wording of the appalling EU/May WAG re. the backstop - which he will then present as an entirely new and acceptable deal.....

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Or alternatively he’s making demands/promises that he knows can’t be met, choose any reason you wish for why.

 

Trying to discern Johnson’s intentions is made problematic by the fact he’s an inveterate liar.

 

His habit of not telling the truth is not the only concern, don’t dismiss the very real possibility that he simply does not know what he’s doing.

 

With Johnson fronting* this it is anyone’s guess what will happen, his words are not a reliable guide to his intentions.

 

 

(* it’s also anybody’s guess who’s actually running the show).

So you think Boris is seriously looking to leave the EU with no deal?

Personally I think he's looking for the same EU/May deal that changes nothing - other than a slight re-wording of the 'backstop'.....

I hope you're right, but doubt it....

Interesting to see that we're now talking about net immigration...., but to look on the bright side the ONS has admitted it's previously flawed calculations and is trying another "experimental series".

11 hours ago, mommysboy said:

I'm not so sure.  In some respects this is a survivor's list.  There has been a form of exodus, and I would suppose they didn't leave because they had too much money.  Thailand's a great place if you have 50k and above at your disposal.

I've known quite a few who have left - and it had nothing to do with money for any of them.

Having said this, I agree that the falling exchange rates and uncertainty/fear of the ever changing Immigration rules - may well result in more than a few leaving.

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

You really ought get the facts right. Of course it is in the brexiteers interest to make out that the EU is responsible for the UK not making better use of the EU legislation that is available.

 

The lack of a surge in migrants from the two EU countries after seven years of transitional controls were lifted on 1 January 2014 confounds predictions by Ukip’s Nigel Farage and others that 5,000 Romanians and Bulgarians would arrive “each week, every week” for several years.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/30/no-surge-romanian-bulgarian-migrants-controls-lifted

The article is years out of date, and the ONS was yesterday forced to admit that it under-estimated EU immigration statistics (whilst over estimating non-EU immigration) for more than a decade.....

But I do agree that the UK govt. also holds a large share of the blame.

8 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

But we had a previous referendum to stay in.

 

The usual Brexit nonsense that because they won by a small margin it must never ever be challenged. Seems they're all <deleted>-scared of democracy really. No one must ever change their mind; and we must pretend that referendums aren't just advisory!

 

Any future referendum must include:

1. Leaving with no deal.

2. Leaving with the deal currently on the table, whatever that is at the time.

3. Remaining with the current UK membership deal.

 

Intelligent people can then reason between the 3 to decide the one that's best for the UK's future while Brexiters can cry in their beer because they didn't get their own way.

"The usual Brexit nonsense that because they won by a small margin it must never ever be challenged. Seems they're all <deleted>-scared of democracy really. No one must ever change their mind; and we must pretend that referendums aren't just advisory!"

I'm very sorry to see that you're misrepresenting me in this way .

I've posted otherwise (apart from the bit about 'only advisory') time and time again....

 Edit - "But we had a previous referendum to stay in."

Very true - and how many years did it take to get another referendum on this issue?

13 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

 

No, that's a bit 'gamey' isn't it?  The poll would be about the final deal :  accept/reject.  

 

What happens thereafter would be up to Parliament.  So back to square one, which is where we always land up, and always will land up when the main issue is avoided.

 

We either go ahead with Brexit regardless, or revoke.  There is no appetite for either, but there it is.  That's the choice!

As you say, if a further referendum was limited to accept/reject then it would be again "up to Parliament" - and they've proven themselves to be incapable of doing anything other than representing their own interests.....

"So back to square one, which is where we always land up, and always will land up when the main issue is avoided."

Agree entirely.  The main issue is that there was a referendum, and that the result was to leave the EU.

Hence my 'argument' re. another referendum and democratically acceptable options.  Edit - a referendum based on BRINO/remain is not at all funny....

On 8/21/2019 at 8:29 AM, Rookiescot said:

Why has no-one contacted Farrage?

This was all his idea so surely he has all the answers.

I know you thought this was funny, but you raise a good point.

Farage was the catalyst who started a new brexit party (that eventually forced the tories to hold a referendum) - so why hasn't he been invited to be an UK negotiator?