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

[vogie]

5 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

Problem with reading comprehension?

I said: "But, really, I do not care who told the most lies."

Understand the difference? I do care about lies but it is rather irrelevant to me whether leavers or remainers lied more. And I gave a reason for that.

You brought the "The whole of Brexit was based on lies" in a previous post and if you cannot reply without being rude, please do not reply at all, your beginning to sound like a remainer. ie, "problem with reading comprehension" and "learn to read" 

So for the last and final time, you initially brought the subject up about lying.

[vogie]

1 hour ago, brewsterbudgen said:

The ramifications of a hard Brexit were certainly not made clear. The people should be asked to choose between this, the Chequers plan, or stay where were are. Let the people decide.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Sorry referendums are not legally binding. ???

[whatsupdoc]

32 minutes ago, vogie said:

You brought the "The whole of Brexit was based on lies" in a previous post and if you cannot reply without being rude, please do not reply at all, your beginning to sound like a remainer. ie, "problem with reading comprehension" and "learn to read" 

So for the last and final time, you initially brought the subject up about lying.

I do not know if you are a native English speaker, I am not. But my reading comprehension in English is quite OK.

 

I said indeed "The whole of Brexit was based on lies" which shows I care about lying.

I also said "But, really, I do not care who told the most lies." And I gave reasons.

 

But somehow you say:  "So you brought up the subject of lying, then you go on to say "I am not bothered who tells lies" 

 

Obviously, your statement has a completely different meaning so that is why I urge you to read more carefully and not alter my phrases.

 

By the way, I do have an idea who lied the most but lack the scientific evidence to back it up. But I can agree that both sides will have told lies (never implied something else).

[whatsupdoc]

1 hour ago, aright said:

But what is known is that EU members can influence the direction the union is going. 

 

By member states do you mean Germany? How are member states, disadvantaged by the euro, going to influence direction other than by voting in extreme right wing governments who threaten to leave if change doesn't happen. 

Many member states are extremely unhappy as evidenced by the voting patterns and the EU Commission continues to sit on its hands. Having a mind of your own doesn't suit the EU federal Project.

 

 

 

By member states I mean member states, not just Germany.

I am convinced that most states profit from the Euro (although part of the public opinion might be different).

 

The voting patterns do not indicate to me that there are states (apart from UK) that really want to leave. But if there are, they must do just that: leave (but accept the consequences).

[brewsterbudgen]

What is the point of putting the Chequers plan to a vote? Its core is totally unacceptable to the EU.

True, in its current form. However, by March 2019 some type of compromise might have been reached to satisfy those in favour of a soft Brexit, or "Brexit in name only".

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[dick dasterdly]

19 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

I do not know if you are a native English speaker, I am not. But my reading comprehension in English is quite OK.

 

I said indeed "The whole of Brexit was based on lies" which shows I care about lying.

I also said "But, really, I do not care who told the most lies." And I gave reasons.

 

But somehow you say:  "So you brought up the subject of lying, then you go on to say "I am not bothered who tells lies" 

 

Obviously, your statement has a completely different meaning so that is why I urge you to read more carefully and not alter my phrases.

 

By the way, I do have an idea who lied the most but lack the scientific evidence to back it up. But I can agree that both sides will have told lies (never implied something else).

"I said indeed "The whole of Brexit was based on lies""

 

Quite, and when another poster pointed out that both sides lied - you came out with "But, really, I do not care who told the most lies."....

 

Judging by your comment "The whole of Brexit was based on lies" and the final sentence above -  "But I can agree that both sides will have told lies (never implied something else)." - presumably you are saying that both the remain and leave arguments were based on nothing other than lies?

[vogie]

21 minutes ago, whatsupdoc said:

I do not know if you are a native English speaker, I am not. But my reading comprehension in English is quite OK.

 

I said indeed "The whole of Brexit was based on lies" which shows I care about lying.

I also said "But, really, I do not care who told the most lies." And I gave reasons.

 

But somehow you say:  "So you brought up the subject of lying, then you go on to say "I am not bothered who tells lies" 

 

Obviously, your statement has a completely different meaning so that is why I urge you to read more carefully and not alter my phrases.

 

By the way, I do have an idea who lied the most but lack the scientific evidence to back it up. But I can agree that both sides will have told lies (never implied something else).

By the fact you mentioned lying in your first post, you brought it up. 

 

[dick dasterdly]

1 minute ago, brewsterbudgen said:

True, in its current form. However, by March 2019 some type of compromise might have been reached to satisfy those in favour of a soft Brexit, or "Brexit in name only".

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

I assume you're talking about the uk parliament/eu and remainers?

[whatsupdoc]

1 minute ago, dick dasterdly said:

I said indeed "The whole of Brexit was based on lies"

 

Quite, and when another poster pointed out that both sides lied - you came out with "But, really, I do not care who told the most lies."....

 

Judging by your comment "The whole of Brexit was based on lies" and the final sentence above -  "But I can agree that both sides will have told lies (never implied something else)." - presumably you are saying that both the remain and leave arguments were based on nothing other than lies?

I said what I said. Your presumption is wrong.

And I am tired of teaching about English reading comprehension and/or drawing logical conclusions.

[mommysboy]

1 hour ago, citybiker said:

 

Because it’s part of the democratic process, virtually any deal that doesn’t allow Brussels authority over the U.K. & affects the EU core principles was going to be unacceptable, that’s been pretty clear from the start as Barnier & the EU will only accept a deal which both deters others from leaving and despite what Barnier says will penalise a leaving MS.

Westminster still has its protocols, is accountable and as it currently stands Barnier et al have shown no compromise at all, unless his orders & directive gets changed from his Bosses.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

In all honesty, it was made clear from the outset that there would be no cherry picking deal, and this has been the response all along. It's just that people chose not to take them at their word.  Tories have spent the last couple of years bickering over a deal that never existed. 

 

 

[brewsterbudgen]

I assume you're talking about the uk parliament/eu and remainers?

Well, Remainers like me are not in favour of any type of Brexit. That's why there has to be a third choice in the second referendum - remaining in the EU.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[mommysboy]

1 minute ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Well, Remainers like me are not in favour of any type of Brexit. That's why there has to be a third choice in the second referendum - remaining in the EU.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Yes but the vote was won to leave, so this can not be turned in to another referendum.  The choice must be soft Brexit (Norway Model), or Hard Brexit.  These are the only options acceptable to Brussels.  

 

 

[citybiker]

In all honesty, it was made clear from the outset that there would be no cherry picking deal, and this has been the response all along. It's just that people chose not to take them at their word.  Tories have spent the last couple of years bickering over a deal that never existed. 
 
 

If no deal ever existed then the whole WA process would have been concluded much sooner.

Yes, Barnier stated no cherry picking (as part of his orders/directive foundation) however the whole WA negotiations continues & gradually deteriorating, the whole point of negotiations is to achieve a constructive and progressive outcome.

If an actual no deal is the tangible result, it'll hurt the EU more the UK.

Sent from my SM-T555 using Tapatalk

[vogie]

22 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Well, Remainers like me are not in favour of any type of Brexit. That's why there has to be a third choice in the second referendum - remaining in the EU.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

There are no remainers and leavers anymore, only dealers or no dealers.

[billd766]

4 hours ago, whatsupdoc said:

Learn to read.

 

Have you not realised by now that it is not what you want, or what I or anybody elses wants, it is what the politicians in the UK government and the EU want.

 

Your voice like mine and everybody elses mean nothing.

 

We can file thousands or millions of posts on TVF and nobody in the UK or EU even knows or cares.

 

If you are a registered voter in the UK then badger your MP. That is your right as a voter and is probably the only way that you can make a difference. 

[billd766]

57 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Well, Remainers like me are not in favour of any type of Brexit. That's why there has to be a third choice in the second referendum - remaining in the EU.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

 

What second referendum would that be?

[vogie]

11 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

Have you not realised by now that it is not what you want, or what I or anybody elses wants, it is what the politicians in the UK government and the EU want.

 

Your voice like mine and everybody elses mean nothing.

 

We can file thousands or millions of posts on TVF and nobody in the UK or EU even knows or cares.

 

If you are a registered voter in the UK then badger your MP. That is your right as a voter and is probably the only way that you can make a difference. 

Bill, he is not British.?

[tomacht8]

1 hour ago, citybiker said:

If no deal ever existed then the whole WA process would have been concluded much sooner.

Yes, Barnier stated no cherry picking (as part of his orders/directive foundation) however the whole WA negotiations continues & gradually deteriorating, the whole point of negotiations is to achieve a constructive and progressive outcome.

If an actual no deal is the tangible result, it'll hurt the EU more the UK.

Sent from my SM-T555 using Tapatalk
 

How do you come to this result?
Clearly the UK and the EU will lose (economic and geo political)
But in the UK, exports to 27 EU countries are burdened with who knows what problems. From the EU perspective, damage (customs duties, new bureaucracy, inspection procedures, certificates of origin, pre-tax registration, etc.) is shared among 27 countries.
In my assessment, the UK will suffer more than any single EU country. The Brexit damage splits up to 27. Conversely, the UK bears the trade damage with 27 EU countries alone.

[david555]

2 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

How do you come to this result.
Clearly the UK and the EU will lose (economic and geo political)
But in the UK, exports to 27 EU countries are burdened with who knows what problems. From the EU perspective, damage (customs duties, new bureaucracy, inspection procedures, certificates of origin, pre-tax registration, etc.) is shared among 27 countries.
In my assessment, the UK will suffer more than any single EU country. The Brexit damage splits up to 27. Conversely, the UK bears the trade damage with 27 EU countries.

Now you are undermining their Brexit rhetoric, ?  they know but it may not be common to know or it means more oil on the  remain  fire

[citybiker]

How do you come to this result?
Clearly the UK and the EU will lose (economic and geo political)
But in the UK, exports to 27 EU countries are burdened with who knows what problems. From the EU perspective, damage (customs duties, new bureaucracy, inspection procedures, certificates of origin, pre-tax registration, etc.) is shared among 27 countries.
In my assessment, the UK will suffer more than any single EU country. The Brexit damage splits up to 27. Conversely, the UK bears the trade damage with 27 EU countries alone.

I don't usually use the DM for a good reason, however when I first read it, the source stated it was from the Times.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5250495/Brussels-admits-bad-Brexit-deal-hurt-EU-states.html

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk

[tomacht8]

1 minute ago, david555 said:

Now you are undermining their Brexit rhetoric, ?  they know but it may not be common to know or it means more oil on the  remain  fire

Instead of dealing with clearly formulated statements, or arguments in terms of content, it is always dismissed by the pro Brexit people with the propaganda phrases: project fear.

That's just too stupid for me as a counter-argument.
Sorry.

[brewsterbudgen]

 
What second referendum would that be?

As already stated, a choice between no deal Brexit, a compromise or "soft" Brexit, or abandoning Brexit and staying as we are.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[tomacht8]

2 minutes ago, citybiker said:

I don't usually use the DM for a good reason, however when I first read it, the source stated it was from the Times.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5250495/Brussels-admits-bad-Brexit-deal-hurt-EU-states.html

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk
 

No question.
Brexit also damages the EU very versatile.
Economically, that's not even contested by Pro Brexit people.
The EU thanks for it (sarcastically speaking).
Geopolitical, the damage is - not monetary - in much higher damage areas.
But the damage to the UK will be greater than for any single EU country.
The damage is easily shared by 27 countries like an insurance company.
With which countries does the UK share its damage?

[david555]

10 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

Instead of dealing with clearly formulated statements, or arguments in terms of content, it is always dismissed by the pro Brexit people with the propaganda phrases: project fear.

That's just too stupid for me as a counter-argument.
Sorry.

But you named a pure FACT ,,,,it hurts the E.U. yes  ,but small % comparing the hurt for U.K.....as trading with a 27 block shall always be prior for candidates trading country against only 1 

[citybiker]

No question.
Brexit also damages the EU very versatile.
Economically, that's not even contested by Pro Brexit people.
The EU thanks for it (sarcastically speaking).
Geopolitical, the damage is - not monetary - in much higher damage areas.
But the damage to the UK will be greater than for any single EU country.
The damage is easily shared by 27 countries like an insurance company.
With which countries does the UK share its damage?

Ah, you say easily shared.

Incorrect I'm afraid as their is an imbalance of regions within the EU.

Look at the primary 'contributors' compared to the primary 'recipients' within the whole EU economic structure.

Easily shared couldn't be further from the truth or fact.

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk

[david555]

1 minute ago, citybiker said:

Ah, you say easily shared.

Incorrect I'm afraid as their is an imbalance of regions within the EU.

Look at the primary 'contributors' compared to the primary 'recipients' within the whole EU economic structure.

Easily shared couldn't be further from the truth or fact.

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk
 

I guess those "imbalance of regions within the EU." shall replace the services done in the U.K. for now …. assembly of whatever is done there now , and they shall be grateful fort that I think
 

[tomacht8]

2 minutes ago, citybiker said:

Ah, you say easily shared.

Incorrect I'm afraid as their is an imbalance of regions within the EU.

Look at the primary 'contributors' compared to the primary 'recipients' within the whole EU economic structure.

Easily shared couldn't be further from the truth or fact.

Sent from my SM-A500FU using Tapatalk
 

Do not hang on in one word.
easily shared.
It is not easy for both sides UK and EU.
But at the core, no single EU country alone is as affected as the UK alone.

[mommysboy]

2 hours ago, citybiker said:

If no deal ever existed then the whole WA process would have been concluded much sooner.

Yes, Barnier stated no cherry picking (as part of his orders/directive foundation) however the whole WA negotiations continues & gradually deteriorating, the whole point of negotiations is to achieve a constructive and progressive outcome.

If an actual no deal is the tangible result, it'll hurt the EU more the UK.

Sent from my SM-T555 using Tapatalk
 

It's not just this bungling government that's for sure, but look what the government has managed to string together- a true dog's Brexit!  

 

Effectively, there is soft or hard Brexit.  Any negotiation in between is worse than either.  I just find it laughable really,

[mommysboy]

24 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

Do not hang on in one word.
easily shared.
It is not easy for both sides UK and EU.
But at the core, no single EU country alone is as affected as the UK alone.

Yes, the UK will likely lose considerably, but individual countries are rather less sclerotic than the EU and the UK is a liberal trading nation that will just as likely thrive as a thorn in the side of the EU.  Quite how the EU is going to gain unfettered access to the city of London I don't know, but one would imagine they will be made to pay through the teeth.

[bristolboy]

52 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

Yes, the UK will likely lose considerably, but individual countries are rather less sclerotic than the EU and the UK is a liberal trading nation that will just as likely thrive as a thorn in the side of the EU.  Quite how the EU is going to gain unfettered access to the city of London I don't know, but one would imagine they will be made to pay through the teeth.

The only obstacle that Brexit will pose for financial houses in the EU is that it will make investing in the UK and clearing sterling denominated financial instruments. A small loss compared to restricted access to the

EU marketplace. Especially given the huge amount of income that UK firms now earn from access to this market. Whereas EU financial houses involvement in UK financial instruments is minor.