UK voters should make final Brexit decision if talks with EU collapse: poll

[My Thai Life]

2 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

The result that nowhere talked about leaving the single market, only about leaving the EU.

You should learn a bit more about the EU and the Single Market before you post. It would save you a lot of time.

Edited September 30, 2018 by My Thai Life

[welovesundaysatspace]

5 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

You should learn a bit more about the EU and the Single Market. 

May I assume you got your understanding about the EU and the Single Market from the same conspiracy theories blogs where you found the alleged words of a dead guy that you used to construct a conspiracy theory about the EU? So I'm not surprised you don't care about facts here either.

Edited September 30, 2018 by welovesundaysatspace

[My Thai Life]

7 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

It's probably the most pragmatic solution.  And so is WTO deal.  If put to the people, no one can argue.

Staying in the Single Market is not an option. It has never been an option except among some very disoriented posters here in the last 2 weeks.

 

There was no option for staying in the SM in the referendum. Leaving the SM is integral to leaving the EU, which is what was voted for.

[welovesundaysatspace]

1 minute ago, My Thai Life said:

There was no option for staying in the SM in the referendum. 

There was no option in the referendum for not joining the Single Market post-Brexit.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

Staying in the Single Market is not an option. It has never been an option except among some very disoriented posters here in the last 2 weeks.

 

There was no option for staying in the SM in the referendum. Leaving the SM is integral to leaving the EU, which is what was voted for.

Never been said? Really?

 

 

[My Thai Life]

3 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

There was no option in the referendum for not joining the Single Market post-Brexit.

Ok, so lobby for it after we've left. Or vote for it - assuming you are British and have the right to vote. Ahem.

 

As for the video montage above, context free cut and paste does wonderful things.

 

[welovesundaysatspace]

1 minute ago, My Thai Life said:

Ok, so lobby for it after we've left.

I hope the UK government will negotiate such agreement, so no one has to lobby for it.

 

 

[melvinmelvin]

34 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

Your desperation and sophistry are increasing daily, and have no relevance whatsoever to the vote or the deal; you would be better off replanning your business affairs than letting off steam here.

 

sophistry?

what a strange word to use in this context

clumsiness - lack of understanding - misconceptions -     come to mind as more pertinent

 

 

[melvinmelvin]

20 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

May I assume you got your understanding about the EU and the Single Market from the same conspiracy theories blogs where you found the alleged words of a dead guy that you used to construct a conspiracy theory about the EU? So I'm not surprised you don't care about facts here either.

 

gosh,

another teebee - no, no sophistry here either

 

[My Thai Life]

22 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

May I assume you got your understanding about the EU and the Single Market from the same conspiracy theories blogs where you found the alleged words of a dead guy that you used to construct a conspiracy theory about the EU? So I'm not surprised you don't care about facts here either.

No conspirace theory whatsoever. My main sources are chosen for balance: The Guardian, The BBC, The Telegraph. Actually most would agree this is unbalanced in favour of the remain narrative. As for your rather strange dismissal of "dead guys", well most of the intellectual climate is shaped by "dead guys" - it was ever thus.

 

Monnet is acknowledged as one of the founders of what became the EU. Anyone who knows about the history of the EU knows this. He has been the guiding spirit for many EU leaders, perhaps most recently Jucker:

 

”I'm ready to be insulted as being insufficiently democratic... I am for secret, dark debates.”

 

“Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?”

 

On the introduction of the Euro: "We decide on something, leave it lying around, and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back.”

 

And you are just another unwitting pawn in the game.

 

 

[The manic]

On 9/27/2018 at 3:39 AM, sandyf said:

Of course brexit patriotism is an ideology applied when it suits.

 

A country that was once a byword for steady, imperturbable (sometimes maddening) stodginess has suddenly revealed itself to be fractious, impulsive and jittery. A land of fair play and cautious pragmatism (don’t rock the boat, no need to frighten the horses, steady as she goes) has become moody and quarrelsome. Thanks to Theresa May, the idea that we are in any way “strong and stable” has lost all credibility.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/08/brexit-england-rethink-identity-nation

The changes in the British way of life are due to mass immigration 

[aright]

1 hour ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Sure you can.

Step 1: Leave the EU.

Step 2: Agreement to stay in the single market.

It takes two to agree and the EU has said staying in the single market isn't on unless we agree to the four freedoms.

[mommysboy]

If the vote meant leave the EU lock,stock, and barrel then you have to ask why didn't they just get on and do that?  After all they are the Brexit party.  

 

According to the strict definition, there would be no trade deal that would not interfere with the mandate.

 

I genuinely thought it did not discount soft Brexit.  I think somewhere in the region of 65% of the electorate want this.  

 

[aright]

1 minute ago, mommysboy said:

If the vote meant leave the EU lock,stock, and barrel then you have to ask why didn't they just get on and do that?  After all they are the Brexit party.  

 

According to the strict definition, there would be no trade deal that would not interfere with the mandate.

 

I genuinely thought it did not discount soft Brexit.  I think somewhere in the region of 65% of the electorate want this.  

 

Because to quote Paul Simon "There must be fifty ways to leave your lover" 

[mommysboy]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-second-referendum-final-say-conservative-mps-dominic-grieve-eu-vote-a8561691.html

 

Clearly they don't think the matter is cut and dried!

[nauseus]

8 hours ago, sandyf said:

"If a member leaves the EU then it leaves the SM."

You are making the assumption that the government is correct in its interpretation of the Article 127 requirement, that does not make it a fact.

"Why is the government so opposed to triggering Article 127? Quite probably it's because of that Gina Miller case. They know they would have to consult parliament before doing so. And if they did, they would discover that there is almost certainly no Commons majority for leaving the single market."

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2018/03/01/article-127-the-key-brexit-decision-with-a-one-month-deadlin

 

"The simplest way to do this is the Norway model (EEA)."

You have obviously chosen to forget how many times I have said this, after all you wouldn't want to be agreeing with anything I have posted, would you.

 

 

 

Re A127 if the so-called experts can't agree what needs to happen then who really knows?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/21/mps-soft-brexit-article-127-eea

 

But if the UK leaves the EU without any agreement re the SM do you really think the EU would allow the UK to stay in it?

 

I just reiterated the most simple way to stay in the SM, nothing to do with what you have said. I also said this option comes with too many conditions and does not solve NI. So it's not for me. 

[welovesundaysatspace]

6 hours ago, aright said:

It takes two to agree and the EU has said staying in the single market isn't on unless we agree to the four freedoms.

Of course, that’s what I meant. Leave the EU. Join the single market again with all its four freedoms. The EU would likely be open for such agreement. It would respect the referendum result (leave the EU) and cause minimal disruption to supply chains and the economy and not create a hard Irish border. All issues solved. 

[kwilco]

Don't think this subproject fear as it's haopening now.....

 

For those who think Brexit is a harmless exercise in returning to the old days.....

 

The Centre for European Reform’s analysis also suggests that the government’s austerity drive would be on the way to completion had Britain voted to stay in the European Union.

It shows that the UK economy is already 2.5% smaller than it would have been had Remain won the referendum. Public finances have been dented by £26bn a year, more than half of the defence budget. This translates to a penalty of £500m a week, a figure that is growing.

[Stupooey]

8 hours ago, The manic said:

The changes in the British way of life are due to mass immigration 

 

I agree. Let's send the Anglo-Saxons back to Germany, where they came from.

[rixalex]

15 hours ago, tebee said:

I have never accused leave voters as a whole to be racist - I am sure there are some that are and i'm equally sure most racists voted leave,  but it not a generalization that should be made.

 

Regarding your assertion that most racists voted to leave...

 

Voting to remain means supporting an immigration system that treats the people of certain other countries preferentially, allowing them to come and go as they please, while on the other hand, forcing people of certain other countries to jump through often impossible hoops, even just to visit. Anybody who opposed racism would be totally opposed to any system that didn't treat all immigrants completely equally.

 

In this day and age in which employers can be taken to court for not having total equality when it comes to bringing new people into the business, it's amazing that the country that demands these standards of business, can itself have such a discriminatory and unfair approach to bringing new people into the country.

 

As the anti-racist i assume you to be tebee, how do you square your dislike of racism with supporting a racist immigration policy?

[sandyf]

12 hours ago, aright said:

I don't think we could agree a deal which the EU would find acceptable.

Single market rules require the free movement from one EU member country to another of goods, people, services and capital. One big issue at the referendum was control of our borders which means controlled but not free movement of people.

Get the facts correct, there is no free movement of people, it is free movement of labour.

It is all about perception and it is ill conceived perception that led to this mess.

 

[sandyf]

11 hours ago, mommysboy said:

 

It's probably the most pragmatic solution.  And so is WTO deal.  If put to the people, no one can argue.

On the 24th July the UK applied to the WTO to establish a schedule based on the EU schedule. The outcome of the application should be known around the end of this month.

In the event of the application being successful and under a WTO scenario the UK would trade globally on the EU tariff levels that it does now.

The whole concept of the UK setting its own tariffs post brexit was nothing more than wishful thinking.

[sandyf]

8 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

Re A127 if the so-called experts can't agree what needs to happen then who really knows?

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/21/mps-soft-brexit-article-127-eea

 

But if the UK leaves the EU without any agreement re the SM do you really think the EU would allow the UK to stay in it?

 

I just reiterated the most simple way to stay in the SM, nothing to do with what you have said. I also said this option comes with too many conditions and does not solve NI. So it's not for me. 

Agreed, no one knows, so why say something automatically means something else.

If one train of thought is correct regarding Article 127, then TM has a real dilemma, live with it or fight it.

If the UK were to remain in the EEA and SM backed by joining EFTA there is every chance the EU would support such an arrangement, best deal they are going to get.

Norway option in itself is not ideal but could be tailored, better than trying to tailor Chequers.

[billd766]

From the BBC News website this morning.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45700833

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

Get the facts correct, there is no free movement of people, it is free movement of labour.

It is all about perception and it is ill conceived perception that led to this mess.

 

 

Facts correct? OK. Free movement of labour was the original concept but that was been expanded and changed to free movement of "people" by the Maastrict Treaty in 1992. There are certain conditions and restrictions but these are difficult to control or are not well applied.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

Agreed, no one knows, so why say something automatically means something else.

If one train of thought is correct regarding Article 127, then TM has a real dilemma, live with it or fight it.

If the UK were to remain in the EEA and SM backed by joining EFTA there is every chance the EU would support such an arrangement, best deal they are going to get.

Norway option in itself is not ideal but could be tailored, better than trying to tailor Chequers.

I can't even understand what you write now.

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, billd766 said:

From the BBC News website this morning.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45700833

 

Quote

Neither will the government agree to anything that divides Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK or makes the country a member of the European Economic Area (EEA) like Norway.

 

This means that there is no possibility of a deal. EU is more of values than economical machine. Economics is just a way to make those values reality.

 

Quote

Restating his backing for Mrs May's Chequers plan, Mr Raab will say: "Our proposals would deliver a historic agreement that provides a roadmap out of the EU and a final deal that will be good for the whole country."

 

On the top of what economical damage already has happened for UK, prepare for a huge crash when everything stops on March 29th as UK is about to leave with no-deal and without transition period.

 

Scaremongering or reality becomening true?

 

 

[mommysboy]

5 hours ago, kwilco said:

Don't think this subproject fear as it's haopening now.....

 

For those who think Brexit is a harmless exercise in returning to the old days.....

 

The Centre for European Reform’s analysis also suggests that the government’s austerity drive would be on the way to completion had Britain voted to stay in the European Union.

It shows that the UK economy is already 2.5% smaller than it would have been had Remain won the referendum. Public finances have been dented by £26bn a year, more than half of the defence budget. This translates to a penalty of £500m a week, a figure that is growing.

 

More to come. I never thought I'd echo the 'get on with it' brigade.  But perhaps it is high time the Government did just that.  Omni-shambles!

 

Let's hope they get their come uppance at the next election.  Well deserved. It wouldn't surprise me if they are out of office for a few terms.

[mommysboy]

1 hour ago, oilinki said:

 

 

This means that there is no possibility of a deal. EU is more of values than economical machine. Economics is just a way to make those values reality.

 

 

On the top of what economical damage already has happened for UK, prepare for a huge crash when everything stops on March 29th as UK is about to leave with no-deal and without transition period.

 

Scaremongering or reality becomening true?

 

 

 

I'll go with scaremongering.

[kwilco]

Brexiteers' lack of foresight is quite breathtaking ...

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-45693341?SThisFB