UK to warn public every week over 'no-deal Brexit': The Times

[citybiker]

Bogus argument. There were no reforms requested by the UK of the EU which prompted Brexit. And nor were there any demanded by the Brexiteers. Not then, not now.

IIRC So former PM David Cameron’s failed visit to discuss was a myth & didn’t happen then?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[citybiker]

I agree that if the EU had been a little more forthcoming then Cameron could have sold the deal to the British people.  Instead we end up with a knee jerk response by the people with the intention being "that will teach them!"  Boy has that backfired with us now scratching around for concessions.  Our only weapon now appears to be the threat of a no deal even though May and the other negotiators admit this would be bad  for Britain and the EU as well.  Apparently though, that would be OK as long as the EU suffers as well as the Brits.

 

All going swimmingly well then.

I don't agree anything has backfired, the UK is still leaving.

 

It's just the WA terms to thrash out now, if it was easy then everyone would do it.

 

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[SheungWan]

1 hour ago, citybiker said:

IIRC So former PM David Cameron’s failed visit to discuss was a myth & didn’t happen then?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Brexiteer mind was made up years before and nothing Cameron or any other PM was going to negotiate would have made the slightest difference as far as the Brexiteers were and are concerned. Exactly the same applies today.

[dunroaming]

54 minutes ago, citybiker said:

I don't agree anything has backfired, the UK is still leaving.

 

It's just the WA terms to thrash out now, if it was easy then everyone would do it.

 

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk

 

 

 

"It will be easy because the EU will want to do a deal", "the EU need us more than we need them".  With that mindset from the start I would say that it has backfired.  Yes we are still leaving but at a very high cost.  And yes we have to thrash out the terms but what terms?

[Grouse]

The Economist, as always, is spot on!

 

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/08/02/no-deal-is-often-better-than-a-bad-deal-not-with-brexit

[bkkcanuck8]

10 hours ago, citybiker said:

The EU have form on leaving any negotiations to the very last minute, burning the midnight oil & coffee going cold is expected.

I agree the MSN are not helping matters, May's red lines are all part of being accountable to the electorate. Despite external European & global viewpoints these negotiations are bound to get messy either way.

Barnier is also accountable, however when MS see their domestic issues being threaten by no compromise then stand by, something will give.

Besides I prefer chess to poker any day.

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk
 

The EU exists and like being in any community there are pros and cons/pluses and minuses.  The EU policy is driven by the fact that on balance that when you add up your pros and cons that overall it is a benefit to being part of that community.  If you give a party outside of that community all that they want without all of the cons of being part of that community, then it becomes more attractive to being outside than being inside.  The end result is that giving the UK a special deal would risk the very community that is the EU.  It is up to the UK to decide basically if they want WTO based rules, Canadian CETA based rules, EFTA based agreement (same as the UK has no but without any voice); or being part of the EU.  Up until now very few brexit backing politicians have wanted to be honest about this with the general public which has lead to 18 months of doing nothing about coming up with a reasonable proposition (whatever that is).  It is thus more likely than not that the UK will exit and go to WTO status which will be both disrupting and will for at least the short/mid term mean another currency adjustment.  No amount of trade with the rest of the world can replace what the UK trades with the EU.  So now, there is an attempt to see if they can find scapegoats and conspiracies - and further avoiding being honest.

Edited August 5, 2018 by bkkcanuck8

[dick dasterdly]

21 hours ago, whatsupdoc said:

Dick Dasterdly had a bit of an incoherent rant (post #373) but you manage to take it to a whole new level....

"It is one big conspiracy and all dissent will be silenced".... Sigh....

 

Any Brexiteers left on this forum with whom we can have a sensible discussion???

 

23 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

The eu has refused to negotiate from day 1, and May agreed to their agenda - which surely tells us all something.....

 

Yes, sections of the media have been telling brits. that in the event of no deal, there will be food shortages/shortages of medicines/no flights in or out of the uk etc. etc.....  And of course, the gullible not only believe this, but keep stating it as fact ?!

I apologise if you found my post to be "an incoherent rant" - but would appreciate it if you would explain which parts you found "incoherent".

 

Edit - An answer would be appreciated, otherwise I will take your post as a typical remainer slur that points out why there are so few remainers (to quote your post) "on this forum with whom we can have a sensible discussion". ☹️

Edited August 6, 2018 by dick dasterdly

[sanuk711]

2 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I apologise if you found my post to be "an incoherent rant" - but would appreciate it if you would explain which parts you found "incoherent"

Can we take it from the word ....."The"...........Just joking Dick I;m not even on this thread.......

[whatsupdoc]

13 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

I apologise if you found my post to be "an incoherent rant" - but would appreciate it if you would explain which parts you found "incoherent".

 

Edit - An answer would be appreciated, otherwise I will take your post as a typical remainer slur that points out why there are so few remainers (to quote your post) "on this forum with whom we can have a sensible discussion". ☹️

Since you asked: anyone understands what exactly is meant by this?

 

Quote from post #373:

To her horror, it became clear that the leave electorate had learned from the pre-referendum propaganda that politicians and media are far from trustworthy!  And so, it wasn't as easy as expected to make the leave electorate change their minds.  Incomprehensibly to politicians and the media - the leave electorate read through their lies and became even more bad-tempered on the subject !

[dick dasterdly]

15 hours ago, SheungWan said:

The Brexiteer mind was made up years before and nothing Cameron or any other PM was going to negotiate would have made the slightest difference as far as the Brexiteers were and are concerned. Exactly the same applies today.

I agree to a certain extent.

 

Cameron and the uk govt.' concerns were (and are) entirely different to the electorates concerns about various aspects of the eu.

[dunroaming]

And so we start another week with the usual mixed messages.  First Fox says that a no deal is 60/40 bet now.  Then May says she is confident of getting a Brexit deal and Fox gets ridiculed, followed by Davis (remember him) warning the EU that they are making a "massive miscalculation" if they think that Britain will not walk away from Brexit talks without a deal.

 

The fallout from all this hype is that people are feeling more and more that they want a say in the final outcome.  That is not the governments plan but by continually bickering and making no progress they are looking more and more inept every day. 

[dunroaming]

5 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

Since you asked: anyone understands what exactly is meant by this?

 

Quote from post #373:

To her horror, it became clear that the leave electorate had learned from the pre-referendum propaganda that politicians and media are far from trustworthy!  And so, it wasn't as easy as expected to make the leave electorate change their minds.  Incomprehensibly to politicians and the media - the leave electorate read through their lies and became even more bad-tempered on the subject !

I would say it was just leavers waffle but Dick would never do that ?

[My Thai Life]

@whatsupdoc here's the translation (rough copy)

 

a. Leavers learned in the build up to the referendum that politicians and media were unreliable,

b. Leavers hardened their position because of a,

c. Leavers voiced their hardened opinions.

 

Hope that helps.

 

PS, as an observer, I'd say the remainers are the ones doing the bullying on this thread.

 

 

Edited August 6, 2018 by My Thai Life

[SheungWan]

15 hours ago, SheungWan said:

The Brexiteer mind was made up years before and nothing Cameron or any other PM was going to negotiate would have made the slightest difference as far as the Brexiteers were and are concerned. Exactly the same applies today.

 

3 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I agree to a certain extent.

Cameron and the uk govt.' concerns were (and are) entirely different to the electorates concerns about various aspects of the eu.

"I agree to a certain extent." Isn't that like being slightly pregnant? ?

[dunroaming]

8 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

@whatsupdoc here's the translation (rough copy)

 

a. Leavers learned in the build up to the referendum that politicians and media were unreliable,

b. Leavers hardened their position because of a,

c. Leavers voiced their hardened opinions.

 

Hope that helps.

 

PS, as an observer, I'd say the remainers are the ones doing the bullying on this thread.

 

 

I think that is a fair assessment of what Dick meant.  The remainers were so sure that people would vote to stay in, many didn't bother to go out and vote and they paid the price for that.  Both sides lied and more people went along with the leave rhetoric.  I understand that totally and I was wavering right up to putting my cross in the box.  It was only after the vote that it became clear what both camps had lied about and then it was too late.

[dick dasterdly]

23 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

In view of what has happened, I'm pretty sure May assumed she could say one thing (brexit means brexit), whilst acting entirely differently.... (i.e. for some incomprehensible reason, agreeing to the eu's negotiating agenda ?...)

 

To her horror, it became clear that the leave electorate had learned from the pre-referendum propaganda that politicians and media are far from trustworthy!  And so, it wasn't as easy as expected to make the leave electorate change their minds.  Incomprehensibly to politicians and the media - the leave electorate read through their lies and became even more bad-tempered on the subject ?!

 

21 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

Since you asked: anyone understands what exactly is meant by this?

 

Quote from post #373:

To her horror, it became clear that the leave electorate had learned from the pre-referendum propaganda that politicians and media are far from trustworthy!  And so, it wasn't as easy as expected to make the leave electorate change their minds.  Incomprehensibly to politicians and the media - the leave electorate read through their lies and became even more bad-tempered on the subject !

I can only apologise again if you found this (admittedly too long sentence) incoherent, but to put it in short sentences, that hopefully even you will understand:-

 

The electorate didn't believe the propaganda spouted by the vast majority of politicians/media/'experts' pre- referendum, and so voted to leave.  Their suspicions were confirmed when the politicians and 'experts' promised Armageddon failed to materialise after the leave vote.

 

Consequently, May spouting 'leave means leave' - whilst acting in the opposite direction by agreeing to the eu's 'order of discussions' makes her determination to pursue a genuine brexit extremely dubious.  Particularly to those who voted brexit.

 

The ever increasing scare stories e.g. flights in and out of the uk will be grounded for a couple of months if there is no deal/the govt. is making plans to stockpile food in case of no deal (whilst retailers say they've heard nothing of the sort from the govt.) etc. etc. are, I suspect, only making leave voters more bad-tempered.  They didn't believe the scare stories first time round, and so are even less likely to believe them now.

 

Once again, I can only apologise for trying to convey all of this in far fewer words - but now (hopefully ?) you are capable of understanding the shorter, easier sentences.

Edited August 6, 2018 by dick dasterdly

[whatsupdoc]

1 minute ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

I can only apologise again if you found this (admittedly too long sentence) incoherent, but to put it in short sentences, that hopefully even you will understand:-

 

The electorate didn't believe the propaganda spouted by the vast majority of politicians/media/'experts' pre- referendum, and so voted to leave.  Their suspicions were confirmed when the politicians and 'experts' promised Armageddon failed to materialise after the leave vote.

 

Consequently, May spouting 'leave means leave' - whilst acting in the opposite direction by agreeing to the eu's 'order of discussions' makes her determination to pursue a genuine brexit extremely dubious.  Particularly to those who voted brexit.

 

The ever increasing scare stories e.g. flights in and out of the uk will be grounded for a couple of months if there is no deal/the govt. is making plans to stockpile food in case of no deal (whilst retailers say they've heard nothing of the sort from the govt.) etc. etc. are, I suspect, only making leave voters more bad-tempered.  They didn't believe the scare stories first time round, and so are even less likely to believe them now.

 

Once again, I can only apologise for trying to convey all of this in far fewer words - that you were unable to understand.

Thank you for the clarification, The initial post, to my taste, was a bit of jumping to conclusions without providing facts or reasoning behind it. My apologies if my comment was conceived as bullying.

 

 

 

[dunroaming]

7 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Once again, I can only apologise for trying to convey all of this in far fewer words - but now (hopefully ?) you are capable of understanding the shorter, easier sentences.

Well the post wasn't directed at me but I understand it perfectly now.  I think you are right and that was certainly part of why so many people originally voted out.  The only people who would have a say in a final vote would be the leavers.  The remainers pretty much retain their position so any change to the outcome would come from the Brexiteers who now believe they are not getting what they voted for.

[My Thai Life]

I guess like a lot of expats I had no vote, not that I was clamouring for one. 

 

The result doesn't affect me personally, except that if I ever decided to go back to the UK and buy a place to live, I'd probably get a better deal if there's a hard brexit, at least in the short term.

 

The country is genuinely divided about this, and so are the main political parties. It's going to be painful whatever the outcome.

 

The whole shebang has brought home so vividly just how broken our political system is, and that makes me sad.

 

I would really like to see the UK contributing to a progressive Europe, but the EU is nearly as dysfunctional as the UK! I think it's increasingly evident how much we're going to miss the EU, and they are really going to miss us too, much more than has been talked about - financially, politically, culturally. What a mess!

 

The major problems that I personally see in the UK will not be solved by exiting the EU.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SheungWan]

37 minutes ago, aright said:

I don't do necks ?

Au contraire. The whole Brexit campaign has been one big brass neck.

[citybiker]

The Economist, as always, is spot on!
 
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/08/02/no-deal-is-often-better-than-a-bad-deal-not-with-brexit

That article is simply re-covering what’s already been discussed many times. Nothing new.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dunroaming]

33 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

I guess like a lot of expats I had no vote, not that I was clamouring for one. 

 

The result doesn't affect me personally, except that if I ever decided to go back to the UK and buy a place to live, I'd probably get a better deal if there's a hard brexit, at least in the short term.

 

The country is genuinely divided about this, and so are the main political parties. It's going to be painful whatever the outcome.

 

The whole shebang has brought home so vividly just how broken our political system is, and that makes me sad.

 

I would really like to see the UK contributing to a progressive Europe, but the EU is nearly as dysfunctional as the UK! I think it's increasingly evident how much we're going to miss the EU, and they are really going to miss us too, much more than has been talked about - financially, politically, culturally. What a mess!

 

The major problems that I personally see in the UK will not be solved by exiting the EU.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Very well put.  The referendum on Brexit has split the country and highlighted just how far apart both sides are.  Sad times.

[dunroaming]

It might be worth acknowledging that remainers and leavers are not all the same.  Both have their views and arguments but in many cases the line between them is quite tenuous.  I believe there was a hardening of the lines after the referendum and that is when the real animosity kicked in.  The more the rhetoric flowed and more the hostility.  It has now become far more than whether Brexit is a good thing or not.

 

It is not party political or even dependant on whether you think of yourself being on the left or the right.  The split covers all sides.

[aright]

1 hour ago, SheungWan said:

Au contraire. The whole Brexit campaign has been one big brass neck.

Tout au contraire. We just haven't been seduced and blinded by the grand scheme; your chosen suzerain.

 

 

 

[citybiker]

It’s been occasionally mentioned that the EU doesn’t have to negotiate with the U.K.

Unfortunately, it’s yet another flawed part of the bigger argument because the U.K. choose to leave, ie: article 8 of the Lisbon Treaty.
The Telegraph’s take on it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/08/05/brussels-will-break-laws-refuses-compromise-brexit/

&

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-1-common-provisions/6-article-8.html


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[dunroaming]

3 minutes ago, citybiker said:

It’s been occasionally mentioned that the EU doesn’t have to negotiate with the U.K.

Unfortunately, it’s yet another flawed part of the bigger argument because the U.K. choose to leave, ie: article 8 of the Lisbon Treaty.
The Telegraph’s take on it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/08/05/brussels-will-break-laws-refuses-compromise-brexit/

&

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-1-common-provisions/6-article-8.html


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I don't know if it counts but the EU did negotiate the figure that the UK would pay when leaving the UK and they did negotiate a backstop position over Northern Ireland.  Not a good negotiation for the UK I know but....

[bkkcanuck8]

10 minutes ago, citybiker said:

It’s been occasionally mentioned that the EU doesn’t have to negotiate with the U.K.

Unfortunately, it’s yet another flawed part of the bigger argument because the U.K. choose to leave, ie: article 8 of the Lisbon Treaty.
The Telegraph’s take on it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/08/05/brussels-will-break-laws-refuses-compromise-brexit/

&

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-1-common-provisions/6-article-8.html


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That just makes it sound like you want to be part of EFTA ?

[whatsupdoc]

6 minutes ago, citybiker said:

It’s been occasionally mentioned that the EU doesn’t have to negotiate with the U.K.

Unfortunately, it’s yet another flawed part of the bigger argument because the U.K. choose to leave, ie: article 8 of the Lisbon Treaty.
The Telegraph’s take on it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/08/05/brussels-will-break-laws-refuses-compromise-brexit/

&

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-1-common-provisions/6-article-8.html


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

1. The Union shall develop a special relationship with neighbouring countries, aiming to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness, founded on the values of the Union and characterised by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation.

2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Union may conclude specific agreements with the countries concerned. These agreements may contain reciprocal rights and obligations as well as the possibility of undertaking activities jointly. Their implementation shall be the subject of periodic consultation.

 

 

I do think that the EU has good relationships with neighboring countries and it will have it with the UK. But I do not see any reason based on this article 8 why they have to negotiate a trade deal (and  more in particular one that would divide the 4 freedoms).

[tebee]

1 hour ago, dunroaming said:

Very well put.  The referendum on Brexit has split the country and highlighted just how far apart both sides are.  Sad times.

It's not been help by a government that has decided to play to the popular mood and double down on the impossible promises made during the campaign while ignoring the views of the other half of the population.

 

Contrary to those who believe May  is a very cleaver remainder I  think she is a very stupid  popularist who believes her own rhetoric and listens only to sycophants who boost those views. 

 

By promising the impossible and ignoring those who disagree with her she  has split the country for years .

[Grouse]

2 hours ago, citybiker said:

 

That article is simply re-covering what’s already been discussed many times. Nothing new.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Rather elegantly put I thought. The Economist didn't say "morons" once ?