1 hour ago, Hi from France said:

before that the UK was "with us" with compatible rules and laws and contributing to the EU 

The shellfish ban, has got nothing to do with rules and laws, or customs documentation - it's about standards, and these have not changed. The UK waters did not, all of a sudden overnight, become more polluted. The fish the French are still catching in UK waters is quite acceptable, but not that caught by the British... Please explain why?

1 hour ago, Hi from France said:

So yes your goods and services were not automatically accepted anymore.

You need to explain much more clearly why our goods became unacceptable, instead of your one liner off the cuff comments, of we're not in your club anymore?

Financial services equivalence, is being used as a punishment tool, since the only reason it has not been agreed is because the EU fear the UK might change their regulations. It's total BS, since a clause can easily cover any deviation in regulations and trading standards, no differently to any other country, i.e. USA.

1 hour ago, Hi from France said:

After that we went our separate ways: of course the UK wanted to get the perks of the EU while following only they rules that please them, without contributing... 

Same old statement. We don't want membership of your club. We want fair trade, and we're not getting that as noted above. The free movement of goods across borders is the only aspect that is defensible in your argument, since of course there will now need to be customs checks and cross border documentation. 

Apart from that there is no valid reason to interrupt trade with a country that has identical regulations and standards, other than as a punishment tactic, to deter others from following suit.

On 2/26/2021 at 12:23 AM, 7by7 said:

Continue operating; so not new after all!

 

However, they almost got it right. From a credible source: More than 1,000 EU firms plan first UK office after Brexit.

More than 1,000 EU firms plan first UK office after Brexit.

Extract from your own quoted source, clearly contradicts your statement therein, first I presume can be considered new...

That article and the BBC news report you later quote is an exact replica of the content of the media I quoted.

But, oh no it can't be true because it came from a right wing media group... ???? ????

14 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

Yes, I have heard of a free trade agreement. Unlike you, it seems, I not only know what the term means in general, I also know details of ours with the EU!

 

At it's most basic, a free trade agreement means that there are no import tariffs or quotas on products from one country entering another. It does not mean the completely free flow of goods and services such as that we enjoyed before Brexit.

 

The agreement between us and the EU runs to 1246 pages, and I freely admit to not having read it in it's entirety!

 

I have, though read the summaries published in the UK press; such as that I linked to in a previous reply to one of your posts where you said "Have you forgotten we're meant to have a free trade agreement with the EU?"

 

As you obviously couldn't be bothered to read it last time; here it is again: Brexit: What are the key points of the deal?

 

 

You're still missing the point, our goods and services complied with EU rules on the 31st Dec. but were all of a sudden unacceptable one second later.

As for new rules regarding the free flow of goods - that's a completely different context. That's related to border controls and checks requiring proper documentation. The punishment and business grabbing tactics, are exactly that - tactics and punishment.

14 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

No; it's an example of either my lack of any mind reading ability or your inability to give any positive benefit to the UK of Brexit.

I just did, with the financial services storey, or did you not understand it?

14 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Does that meet your definition of sitting "on their backsides chewing the cud at mine and the other tax payers expense?"

There you go again, twisting the thread to try to perpetuate an irrelevant argument. If you want to get your dig in, at least make it feasible....

If you check back, you will see my response to a post highlighting the lazy benefits claimants who refuse to work in the fields picking fruit and veg. It did not refer to you specifically, if you are on sickness benefit it's a totally different scenario.

14 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Correct me if I'm wrong; but are most Brexiteers here sitting on their backsides in Thailand and wont be affected by the problems of Brexit until or unless Sterling drops so low they can no longer meet their visa requirement?

You're wrong! We're still British citizens and what effects our country, effects us and our families. You've already highlighted one effect - the value of sterling..

If they've earned their retirement and wish to stay in Thailand, so be it. It's an entirely different scenario to UK benefits claimants who refuse to work, sit on their backsides with their hands held out. I don't see any British in Thailand sat on their backsides holding their hands out for the Thai or UK government to support them. In fact it's quite the contrary, the UK penalise the foreign retiree by freezing their pensions which, like any other British citizen, they have paid into all their working lives, and are just as entitled to their increments, irrespective of where they choose to live out their retirement.

Personally I still have a business in the UK, and pay UK taxes which, it appears, pays for your SSP, since; -

14 hours ago, 7by7 said:

I'm currently receiving SSP, paid for out of my NICs over my 40 years working life

- this statement is incorrect! Benefits are paid out of tax revenues, not NI contributions.

16 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You did not post a ‘news source’ you posted a link to a rightwing outfit that produces propaganda selectively edited propaganda videos for distribution on social media.

 

They are not a ‘news source’.

 

Away with you and your social media propaganda machine.

There you go again arguing semantics, since you cannot contradict the content.  My error in using the word "source" instead of media - happy now.

Now how about answering my earlier question;

What part of the content to which I referred do you consider propaganda and / or  not accurately reported from a reputable source, i.e. the FCA's records made available via an FOI request from Bovill??

I won't hold my breath....

24 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It wasn’t a ‘news cast’ is was social media content cobbled together by a bunch of rightwing geeks.

Whatever you think of the medium, it doesn't detract from the content.

I don't give a chuff who said it, unless it's Gypsy Rose Lee, I only care if the content is valid.

Why does the messenger offend you so, when all that's important is the message?

10 hours ago, 7by7 said:

I did my best to give an analogy so simple that even you could understand. Obviously I failed!

Miserably! By using a ridiculous analogy.

10 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Continue operating; so not new after all!

 

However, they almost got it right. From a credible source: More than 1,000 EU firms plan first UK office after Brexit.

That was a good self contradiction. If you'd have listened to the news cast you would have heard that stated.

I'm beginning to think you would argue black is white, just to have the last word... ????

11 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Impossible to repeat an answer never given!

I'll take that as another example of your illiteracy and incomprehension then.... 

11 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

Then why the constant Brexiteer whinge because we've lost the advantages of membership?

 

 

More Brexiteer whingeing.

 

The EU are treating us the same as any other non member, subject to the terms and conditions of the trade agreement we have with them.

 

If you don't like those terms and conditions, complain to the man who negotiated it, David George Hamilton Frost, Baron Frost, CMG, and the man who signed it, Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.

 

The long list of ones the Brexiteers whinge about losing.

 

Including, but by no means restricted to, those you've listed.

More deflection... ????

????

17 hours ago, candide said:

Exactly, Covid! 

Obviously, you did not read the whole article. The higher unemployment rates caused by Covid should have made it easier to find local manpower, but the work is too hard for them!

 

Quotes:

"Hopes that Cornish workers could step into the shoes of those who are now unable to travel from the European Union have been dashed. "It's idealistic to think that because of Covid and the higher than usual unemployment rates that those people would come in and do that work."

'Frankly, the people that we've had to come and do this work, the locals, may last a day or two days, but they certainly don't last two or three months.'

 

You're quite right! I picked up on one quotation, utterly indefensible... ????

18 hours ago, GrandPapillon said:

now that's funny as a credible source ????

You guys really struggle, don't you?

It wasn't the source, it was the medium..... ????

23 hours ago, Tofer said:

On 2/25/2021 at 6:14 AM, bannork said:

The British backbone extolled by Tofer seems to be lacking in Cornwall.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9286973/Worlds-largest-daffodil-grower-Cornwall-forced-let-flowers-ROT-not-pickers.html

 

You're forgetting all about Covid, yet again.

 

Extract from your quoted article;

But since Covid and the end of free movement following Brexit, the business only has around 400 flower pickers.  

Edited 23 hours ago by Tofer

I was only repeating your own quotation back to you, that sighted Covid.

However, as I said earlier, I couldn't agree more about the idle benefit claimants. Just to clarify, I wasn't referring to those individuals when I commented about the remainers lack of backbone and British spirit, I think it's obvious to a blind man on a flying horse that you'll find none of that attribute amongst that segment of society.

But correct me if I'm wrong, are all remainers sat on their backsides chewing the cud at mine and the other tax payers expense?

19 hours ago, bannork said:

Which is the bigger market?

Who cares. It's business, and confidence, in the UK's financial services sector.

Who's financial services sector is biggest - UK or EU? Kindly avail me of that information as I'm too lazy, not so interested, and certainly not so pedantic to go searching for every minute bit of information, to try to justify my opinions.

17 hours ago, bannork said:

A bunch of namby pamby snowflakes if you ask me, cut their benefits and let them eat fish caught in British waters.

I agree whole heartedly with this sentiment, although you'd never get them on a fishing boat....

18 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You’ve just listed a few:

Have you forgotten we're meant to have a free trade agreement with the EU?

Or maybe they aren't respecting it because they can't pull their finger out to sign it. I was under the impression it was active under a temporary approval.