Brexit never? Britain can still change its mind, says Article 50 author

[simoh1490]

Just now, baansgr said:

Because they are the ones demanding it needs paying so the onus is on the Eu. All your previous posts about playground behavior of turning the questions round and you do it again. So the question stands why havnt they calculated an exact figure with a breakdown

I'm not trying to be obtuse it's just that if we ask them they will say, 40 to 80 billion, based on who calculates it, if you were on the receiving end of that, what would you do, you'd calculate it yourself and say here, this is what we think owe you so this is what we'll pay. So my question as to why haven't we made that calculation is a valid one rather than any games being played.

[baansgr]

Just now, simoh1490 said:

I'm not trying to be obtuse it's just that if we ask them they will say, 40 to 80 billion, based on who calculates it, if you were on the receiving end of that, what would you do, you'd calculate it yourself and say here, this is what we think owe you so this is what we'll pay. So my question as to why haven't we made that calculation is a valid one rather than any games being played.

Yes, so firstly they should present their findings and exact figures so the UK can check if its correct. Thats business the world over. 

[Orac]

2 minutes ago, baansgr said:

Yes, so firstly they should present their findings and exact figures so the UK can check if its correct. Thats business the world over. 

 

They are still waiting for the UK to say which EU bodies it wants to remain in which is the other part of the equation needed to come up with a figure. Don't forget as recent as April this year DD was claiming the medical and banking agencies would remain in London so there would have been a cost to this and now there is a further cost for their relocation.

[baansgr]

3 minutes ago, Orac said:

 

They are still waiting for the UK to say which EU bodies it wants to remain in which is the other part of the equation needed to come up with a figure. Don't forget as recent as April this year DD was claiming the medical and banking agencies would remain in London so there would have been a cost to this and now there is a further cost for their relocation.

So, quotes wih different outcomes, easy. The onus is on the EU.

[Orac]

1 minute ago, baansgr said:

So, quotes wih different outcomes, easy. The onus is on the EU.

 

No onus on anyone to do anything - we can leave without anything if we want to do so though that would be rather foolish.

[baansgr]

5 minutes ago, Orac said:

 

No onus on anyone to do anything - we can leave without anything if we want to do so though that would be rather foolish.

Correct and surely as the EU is saying talks cant progress until a 'divorce' settlement is agreed upon. I would think they would actually at leadt try and come up with a substantiated figure. 

[baansgr]

Im all for the UK standing by its commitments whether that be 1 Euro  or, 1 trillion but lets get some factual figures presented and then move on. On the flipside as UK has contributed substantially over the years to EU assets, this figure of UK share should be deducted. Its not rocket science. 

[Orac]

1 minute ago, baansgr said:

Correct and surely as the EU is saying talks cant progress until a 'divorce' settlement is agreed upon. I would think they would actually at leadt try and come up with a substantiated figure. 

 

It is brinksmanship as once a figure is given then has to be changed it looks politically weak which is the same for both sides. The EU are recognising how bad the UK are at it and staying quiet as they know we will fold. 

 

The whole referendum was brinksmanship by Cameron for party political reasons, TMs snap election was the same gambit that failed and they have just upped offer to 40bn which is getting closer to the EUs firsr numbers. TM just doesn't have the full support of either her own MPs or the population as a whole so the EU can just sit back and wait.

[baansgr]

1 minute ago, Orac said:

 

It is brinksmanship as once a figure is given then has to be changed it looks politically weak which is the same for both sides. The EU are recognising how bad the UK are at it and staying quiet as they know we will fold. 

 

The whole referendum was brinksmanship by Cameron for party political reasons, TMs snap election was the same gambit that failed and they have just upped offer to 40bn which is getting closer to the EUs firsr numbers. TM just doesn't have the full support of either her own MPs or the population as a whole so the EU can just sit back and wait.

So that just proves how dishonest and contemptuous the EU is

[Orac]

So that just proves how dishonest and contemptuous the EU is

Not at all. It is a negotiation and their job is to get the best deal for the countries they represent which no longer includes the UK. It was always the same and was highlighted in Brexit the Movie where the claim was that the EU was too protectionist and inward looking.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Retiredandhappyhere]

On 11/13/2017 at 7:45 PM, Grouse said:

You're sounding increasingly worried Han. You should be, there won't be a happy ending

You are wrong!  There will be a reasonably satisfactory ending for both sides, as it is in each side's interest to find one.

No doubt, even when such a solution is found, you will still claim it as one which supports your long-held point of view.

The group of German companies which recently called for the UK to remain in the EU, which is of course a non-starter, would surely prefer that a good trading relationship with the UK remains after Brexit, rather than a non-deal and I am sure that companies in many other EU countries feel the same way. Obviously, those companies will not be making the final decisions on the trade agreements, but they will try to exercise some influence on their leaders, some of whom (notably Merkel and even Macron) are not quite in the strong positions of power that they were a few weeks ago.

 

Important disputes with Poland, for example,  demonstrate that the 27 members are not quite "as one" as is often suggested. There is still a possibility that the UK will prove to be not alone in wanting to leave the club, although others may not be able to afford the divorce bill. 

[nauseus]

4 minutes ago, Retiredandhappyhere said:

You are wrong!  There will be a reasonably satisfactory ending for both sides, as it is in each side's interest to find one.

No doubt, even when such a solution is found, you will still claim it as one which supports your long-held point of view.

The group of German companies which recently called for the UK to remain in the EU, which is of course a non-starter, would surely prefer that a good trading relationship with the UK remains after Brexit, rather than a non-deal and I am sure that companies in many other EU countries feel the same way. Obviously, those companies will not be making the final decisions on the trade agreements, but they will try to exercise some influence on their leaders, some of whom (notably Merkel and even Macron) are not quite in the strong positions of power that they were a few weeks ago.

 

Important disputes with Poland, for example,  demonstrate that the 27 members are not quite "as one" as is often suggested. There is still a possibility that the UK will prove to be not alone in wanting to leave the club, although others may not be able to afford the divorce bill. 

Well said. I think this is basically the line that government laid out in January and that Davis is trying to follow. All this Hard Brexit nonsense did not originate with Theresa May but has been pushed out as a part of the post-referendum interference by Project Fear & Co.

 

I hope too, that a sensible solution is adopted before too long. Both remainers and the EU itself are spending far too much time making Brexit more difficult than it needs to be - its complicated enough without bickering - the EU would be better off worrying about its newly emerging internal problems. 

[Chelseafan]

3 hours ago, Orac said:

 

They are still waiting for the UK to say which EU bodies it wants to remain in which is the other part of the equation needed to come up with a figure. Don't forget as recent as April this year DD was claiming the medical and banking agencies would remain in London so there would have been a cost to this and now there is a further cost for their relocation.

The monies are for outstanding commitments not ongoing or future payments. That's how I understand it anyhow.

Edited November 22, 2017 by Chelseafan

[simoh1490]

There's lots of commentary in the press this morning from economists giving their views on the impact of the budget, pick any broadsheet, they all say the same thing. On one point they all agree, Britains debt is a major structural problem that wont allow taxes to be reduced until it is cleared. And that is BEFORE considering any further increase in debt levels caused by Brexit divorce payments and a potentially shrunken economy that would result from a hard Brexit! Meanwhile, of course, we have public sector workers, police, firemen, nurses etc., all clamouring for their first wage increase in goodness how many years. It goes without saying that any change in government would worsen the debt picture and consequently, the levels of taxation.

 

It's also quite widely believed that the recent increase by BOE in the lending rate may need to be reversed later this year, just as well really since the combination of rising interest rates and high government debt is a dangerous combination, the trouble is, low-interest rates for longer is a sign of a stagnant economy. you see the conundrum!

 

"Britain faces its worst period of economic growth in more than half a century after official data revealed a country hamstrung by feeble productivity and Brexit".

 

"But despite the extra cash most government departments will still experience deep cuts over the next five years, as Mr Hammond struggles to get the public finances under control".

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/budget-spending-latest-economy-growth-cash-philip-hammond-a8070696.html

 

Edited November 23, 2017 by simoh1490

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, simoh1490 said:

There's lots of commentary in the press this morning from economists giving their views on the impact of the budget, pick any broadsheet, they all say the same thing. On one point they all agree, Britains debt is a major structural problem that wont allow taxes to be reduced until it is cleared. And that is BEFORE considering any further increase in debt levels caused by Brexit divorce payments and a potentially shrunken economy that would result from a hard Brexit! Meanwhile, of course, we have public sector workers, police, firemen, nurses etc., all clamouring for their first wage increase in goodness how many years. It goes without saying that any change in government would worsen the debt picture and consequently, the levels of taxation.

 

It's also quite widely believed that the recent increase by BOE in the lending rate may need to be reversed later this year, just as well really since the combination of rising interest rates and high government debt is a dangerous combination, the trouble is, low-interest rates for longer is a sign of a stagnant economy. you see the conundrum!

 

"Britain faces its worst period of economic growth in more than half a century after official data revealed a country hamstrung by feeble productivity and Brexit".

 

"But despite the extra cash most government departments will still experience deep cuts over the next five years, as Mr Hammond struggles to get the public finances under control".

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/budget-spending-latest-economy-growth-cash-philip-hammond-a8070696.html

 

A broad claim so I just picked the Express out of the hat - no such doom and gloom there - surprise or what? 

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/883102/Budget-2017-Brexit-UK-ready-no-deal-Hammond-sets-3billion-budget

[simoh1490]

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

A broad claim so I just picked the Express out of the hat - no such doom and gloom there - surprise or what? 

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/883102/Budget-2017-Brexit-UK-ready-no-deal-Hammond-sets-3billion-budget

The Express is not a broadsheet, it's a tabloid and like other newspapers of its type, The Mirror, The Sun, The Daily Mail, cannot be relied on for serious objective fact from reliable sources. The choices are The Guardian which Brexiteers don't seem to like for some reason, The Telegraph which Brexiteers seem to label the torygraph, hence I quoted from the Independent - don't tell me Brexiteers have problems with the Independent also, or is it the case that they have problems with any broadsheet and prefer only tabloid journalism!

[sanuk711]

On 11/10/2017 at 3:53 PM, webfact said:

Thus far, there is no sign of a change of heart on Brexit in opinion polls

You Know I really do get a feeling that if they ran the poll again--Leaving would have an even larger majority. I think that the way the EU has acted to wards what they say is a friend that just wants to leave the party...is starting to get up the Brits nose ..Just a little

[simoh1490]

5 minutes ago, sanuk711 said:

You Know I really do get a feeling that if they ran the poll again--Leaving would have an even larger majority. I think that the way the EU has acted to wards what they say is a friend that just wants to leave the party...is starting to get up the Brits nose ..Just a little

I think that last part is very true, I'm not sure about the first part however, I think the population now knows far more about what might be involved in Brexit so it's difficult to know how they might react, I'd like to find out though.

Edited November 23, 2017 by simoh1490

[nauseus]

4 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

The Express is not a broadsheet, it's a tabloid and like other newspapers of its type, The Mirror, The Sun, The Daily Mail, cannot be relied on for serious objective fact from reliable sources. The choices are The Guardian which Brexiteers don't seem to like for some reason, The Telegraph which Brexiteers seem to label the torygraph, hence I quoted from the Independent - don't tell me Brexiteers have problems with the Independent also, or is it the case that they have problems with any broadsheet and prefer only tabloid journalism!

Just making a point. By reliable I assume that you mean fair and unbiased news?  Just because the Guardian is good for taking up two train seats, it certainly cannot be said to be unbiased; many contributors to the Indy are guilty of bias too.

 

No big budget complaints in the Telewag that I can see but I can't see it all as I'm too cheap to subscribe.

 

The BBC haven't tried to kick Hammond in the crutch, either.

 

Like it or not, the tabloids are as relevant as the rest, probably more relevant. 

[sanuk711]

18 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

I'd like to find out though.

If the polls are anything to go by-----and they certainly haven't been that reliable of late. It seems the Brexit people have stayed firm--

[simoh1490]

1 minute ago, nauseus said:

Just making a point. By reliable I assume that you mean fair and unbiased news?  Just because the Guardian is good for taking up two train seats, it certainly cannot be said to be unbiased; many contributors to the Indy are guilty of bias too.

 

No big budget complaints in the Telewag that I can see but I can't see it all as I'm too cheap to subscribe.

 

The BBC haven't tried to kick Hammond in the crutch, either.

 

Like it or not, the tabloids are as relevant as the rest, probably more relevant. 

Utter rubbish and nonsense, no thinking person who goes in search of fact and educated opinion reads tabloids, period, except for entertainment!

 

Desmond is the owner of The Express and he's an ex-porn baron and a budding rock drummer; The Sun is famous for page three tits; the Mail and I quote:  "The Daily Mail has been widely criticized for its unreliability, as well as printing of sensationalist and inaccurate scare stories of science and medical research^{[11][12][13][14][15]}and of copyright violations". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail

 

Gawd help us if those are the sources of your information on Brexit, no wonder you hold the views that you do.

[simoh1490]

7 minutes ago, sanuk711 said:

If the polls are anything to go by-----and they certainly haven't been that reliable of late. It seems the Brexit people have stayed firm--

It's a difficult one I agree. On the one hand, there's the democracy angle, the people have voted etc. But there's also the "decision being reversed on appeal" aspect, new information coming to light or rather, aspects of what Brexit really means in practice being made more clear. Others will disagree with me I know but I don't think the second of those two things contravenes the first or is at odds with it, I think the second is merely a logical extension of the first. My earlier analogy on this compared a second vote and democracy with that of justice, do we deny a condemned man a second hearing when the facts become more clear and if we do, is that not still justice.

[nauseus]

3 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

Utter rubbish and nonsense, no thinking person who goes in search of fact and educated opinion reads tabloids, period, except for entertainment!

 

Desmond is the owner of The Express and he's an ex-porn baron and a budding rock drummer; The Sun is famous for page three tits; the Mail and I quote:  "The Daily Mail has been widely criticized for its unreliability, as well as printing of sensationalist and inaccurate scare stories of science and medical research^{[11][12][13][14][15]}and of copyright violations". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail

 

Gawd help us if those are the sources of your information on Brexit, no wonder you hold the views that you do.

You are very rude, aren't you? I don't particularly take much notice of any of the papers because they all have their own leanings, as obviously do you. 

 

As for the EU, my opinion came from extensive research for balanced facts and arguments, with more research to find support or fair opposition for or against those arguments. The EU did not emerge well.

 

Enjoy your "educated" opinions from the Guardian.  

 

 

[simoh1490]

2 minutes ago, nauseus said:

You are very rude, aren't you? I don't particularly take much notice of any of the papers because they all have their own leanings, as obviously do you. 

 

As for the EU, my opinion came from extensive research for balanced facts and arguments, with more research to find support or fair opposition for or against those arguments. The EU did not emerge well.

 

Enjoy your "educated" opinions from the Guardian.  

 

 

Indeed, I lean towards fact, very much so, every time.

 

And it's all well and good doing extensive research about the EU  but what about doing some extensive research on the UK because right now that's where the problem is and it is after all your home country, the EU isn't.

[nauseus]

5 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

Indeed, I lean towards fact, very much so, every time.

 

And it's all well and good doing extensive research about the EU  but what about doing some extensive research on the UK because right now that's where the problem is and it is after all your home country, the EU isn't.

Exactly what problem are you talking about? Do you really think that the UK is alone with problems? 

 

You need to take a better look at the EU (even though it is not a country, mine or anyone else's). 

 

  

 

[simoh1490]

3 hours ago, nauseus said:

Exactly what problem are you talking about? Do you really think that the UK is alone with problems? 

 

You need to take a better look at the EU (even though it is not a country, mine or anyone else's). 

 

  

 

I don't care what's happening in the EU in so far as this debate goes, the EU is not my country and I've no reason nor intention of taking a better look.

 

To be honest, that statement sounds as though you have a deeper dislike of the EU than you do of the Brexit/Remain issue, do you have cooked in views on the EU?

 

What problem are you talking about you ask. Why nauseus, I'm talking about the same single problem in the UK that I've been talking about since these debates first started, the economy!  In case you haven't noticed indeed are not aware, UK government borrowings are some 90% of output, the deficit is climbing and as a consequence, the debt mountain is getting bigger. Osborne tried to tackle that but much of the population didn't like it, austerity became a bad word. So now we've given up on austerity and in fact we've now gone the other way and the earliest date for clearing the debt is 2031 instead of 2019. Debt, of course, has to be serviced, interest payments have to be made and that's fine if the economy is in good shape, the UK's is not. Soooo, high debt in a bad economy means we don't have income to pay the interest on our debt, if the economy improves then interest rates will go up and the debt will become more expensive to service - and then on top of all of that, we have the Brexit bills, hmmmm!

 

 

Edited November 23, 2017 by Ron19
Edit out offensive troll comment.

[chrissables]

55 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

Utter rubbish and nonsense, no thinking person who goes in search of fact and educated opinion reads tabloids, period, except for entertainment!

 

Desmond is the owner of The Express and he's an ex-porn baron and a budding rock drummer; The Sun is famous for page three tits; the Mail and I quote:  "The Daily Mail has been widely criticized for its unreliability, as well as printing of sensationalist and inaccurate scare stories of science and medical research^{[11][12][13][14][15]}and of copyright violations". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail

 

Gawd help us if those are the sources of your information on Brexit, no wonder you hold the views that you do.

Have you searched the reliability of  wikipedia? 

[simoh1490]

Just now, chrissables said:

Have you searched the reliability of  wikipedia? 

I have a past association with Fleet Street, I don't need to rely on Wiki for my opinion, I know what the people who work for those papers think and I know what the newspaper owners thinking is.

[chrissables]

Just now, simoh1490 said:

I have a past association with Fleet Street, I don't need to rely on Wiki for my opinion, I know what the people who work for those papers think and I know what the newspaper owners thinking is.

But you quoted wiki. 

 

You know what people who work for those newspapers think? A tad ambiguous don't you think?

 

Also what a person who works for a newspaper thinks does not make necessarily make them a wise old sage. 

[simoh1490]

1 minute ago, chrissables said:

But you quoted wiki. 

 

You know what people who work for those newspapers think? A tad ambiguous don't you think?

 

Also what a person who works for a newspaper thinks does not make necessarily make them a wise old sage. 

Tell me you're not going to try and debate that Uk tabloids are a reliable and intelligent source of information. 

 

http://www.humantruth.info/uk_newspapers_comparison.html

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/facebook-more-trusted-news-daily-star-according-bbc-commissioned-survey/