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

[bristolboy]

16 minutes ago, rixalex said:

 

What in god's name are you talking about? The internet is full of quotes from remainers prior to the vote saying how it was a one off vote, including videos like the one above that was posted here yesterday.

 

And to repeat the question you ignored, along with my other points, you are seriously trying to suggest that had Farage lost and had he gone on to campaign for a second vote to confirm that we were really staying in the EU, you would have been arguing in agreement with him?

I wrote that no Brexiters openly disagreed with Farage about his statement. How does your video disprove that.

As for hypothetical contrary-to-fact suppositions, the reverse could be appled to Brexiters, couldn't it?

[rixalex]

4 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I wrote that no Brexiters openly disagreed with Farage about his statement. How does your video disprove that.

As for hypothetical contrary-to-fact suppositions, the reverse could be appled to Brexiters, couldn't it?

OK. And so the countless interviews with countless remainers in the years before the vote, all saying that it was a one off vote, prove nothing, unless in the several hour window between Farage making his statement and the results being announced, they are reported as having disagreed with him?

 

We are expected to believe that had any of those remainers been asked what they thought of Farage's statement, that they would have said, "Yes actually, i know that i've just spent the last two years saying that the vote will be a one off, but i've just completely changed my mind and i think Farage is right, we'll need to vote again on this".

 

Regarding selectively using the word of Farage, when you know full well that had he lost and had he campaigned for another vote you would have described him and the idea as preposterous; probably would have laughed and mocked him just like Nick Clegg did in the video above. And now here you are, along with Clegg and all the rest, arguing for that exact same thing. And the only response you can muster to the utter and blatant hypocrisy of your position is, "the other side has double standards too".

 

I would say it is nursery school level but don't want to do a disservice to nursery school students.

 

[tebee]

Sir Ivan Rogers has done another insightful speech.

 

http://www.britishirishchamber.com/2018/09/07/sir-mark-ivan-rogers-kcmg-speech-at-british-irish-chamber-of-commerce-annual-gala-dinner/

 

Self absorption and muddled thinking in London, of which there is plenty on every side , is met with dangerous complacency and an absence of much serious thinking about the “British question” on the EU side of the table.

 

...

 

There is now, in my view, a higher risk than the markets are currently pricing of a disorderly breakdown in Brexit negotiations, and of our sleepwalking, into a major crisis, not because either negotiating team actively seeks it, but precisely because each side misreads each other’s real incentives and political constraints and cannot find any sort of landing zone for a deal, however provisional.

 

...

 

 

No FTA on the planet is remotely like the Single Market. If you want to leave the Single Market because you can’t accept the jurisdiction of a “foreign” Court, and enforcement action taken by a foreign executive, that’s fine and entirely legitimate, but then don’t pretend that the trade you end up with with former partners will be at the same level on the same terms, it will not, nowhere near and on services, the difference will be radical.

 

 

 

 

[candide]

6 hours ago, nauseus said:

Er, no. It doesn't work like that. And why do the French farmers require such huge subsidies I wonder? 

Yes, it works like that. ?

 

[billd766]

13 hours ago, bristolboy said:

There's this odd piece of doublethink from leavers. On the one hand, they want the UK to leave, on the other they don't want the UK to leave because of the money. Bild766 tries ludicrously enough to have it both ways.

 

Billd does not try to have it both ways. It is just my opinion and carries the same weight as your opinion. That is simply nothing as it is ONLY an opinion.

 

There are only 650 people who CAN actually change things legally and the are the MPs in the government, I know I am not one of them and I am sure that you are not one either.

 

You, like me, are voicing an opinion on an English language website in Thailand that even if anybody in the UK took any notice of it, would simply ignore it as rants from expats abroad who probably shouldn't even be allowed to vote on Brexit.

 

You can rant on all you like but nothing will be done and only a few posters will care about it enough to comment.

 

If you want to have a voice then go to the UK, find a constituency and stand in the next election for whatever party you feel suits you. IF you get elected then you can have your voice heard and listened to and perhaps alter the course of Brexit. Other than that just keep ranting here where some people will listen to you and some, like me will disagree with you.

[nauseus]

5 minutes ago, candide said:

Yes, it works like that. ?

 

Why don't you add the link? Don't worry I found it anyway. The figures above had to be calculated - they are not official - but I expect they are valid and show the relative advantage that France has in this area. From the same report below is the total received by each member state via the CAP.  You can see that France is way above everyone else and more than double of the UK. This bias has boosted the French farming sector but relatively hampered British agriculture, leading to an increased British dependence on food, largely imported from the continent, which of course we have to pay for and rely on. to a certain extent.

 

 

 

 

CAP allocations come out of the total EU budget. They have traditionally favoured the French since the Treaty of Rome. Thatcher saw this imbalance and it is why the UK started receiving rebates in 1984, although Blair managed to give away about 20% of those. 

 

Like agriculture, the stealthy, long-term. erosion of British industrial capacity, in no small part encouraged by the EU, has similarly benefitted other EU nations, particularly Germany.  

[Srikcir]

20 minutes ago, nauseus said:

erosion of British industrial capacity, in no small part encouraged by the EU

And erosion of British industrial capacity ignored by the British?

[candide]

28 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Why don't you add the link? Don't worry I found it anyway. The figures above had to be calculated - they are not official - but I expect they are valid and show the relative advantage that France has in this area. From the same report below is the total received by each member state via the CAP.  You can see that France is way above everyone else and more than double of the UK. This bias has boosted the French farming sector but relatively hampered British agriculture, leading to an increased British dependence on food, largely imported from the continent, which of course we have to pay for and rely on. to a certain extent.

 

 

 

 

CAP allocations come out of the total EU budget. They have traditionally favoured the French since the Treaty of Rome. Thatcher saw this imbalance and it is why the UK started receiving rebates in 1984, although Blair managed to give away about 20% of those. 

 

Like agriculture, the stealthy, long-term. erosion of British industrial capacity, in no small part encouraged by the EU, has similarly benefitted other EU nations, particularly Germany.  

I did not hyde anything as you seem to alledge, as I never contested your figures. I just stressed the net contribution is a more relevant indicator.

 

As for UK getting less than half of the subsidy that France receives, it reflects the differences in output. The amounts received are more or less proportional to the respective agricultural revenues generated.

 

As for the CAP being the reason for the current low output of UK agricultural sector, I have not investigated it. However, I seem to remember that it is not a recent phenomena and that it was already the case at the beginning of last century.

 

[nauseus]

15 minutes ago, candide said:

I did not hyde anything as you seem to alledge, as I never contested your figures. I just stressed the net contribution is a more relevant indicator.

 

As for UK getting less than half of the subsidy that France receives, it reflects the differences in output. The amounts received are more or less proportional to the respective agricultural revenues generated.

 

As for the CAP being the reason for the current low output of UK agricultural sector, I have not investigated it. However, I seem to remember that it is not a recent phenomena and that it was already the case at the beginning of last century.

 

I didn't say you were hiding anything. I just asked for the link.What I am saying is that British farm production has been discouraged by the EU, in favour of France, the same as industrial capacity has been for Germany. I don't think that there will be any comprehensive data for 1901 but good luck.

Edited September 17, 2018 by nauseus

[nauseus]

42 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

And erosion of British industrial capacity ignored by the British?

Yes, that's true too, except for all the people that lost jobs in British heavy industry. I know that the EU is not the only reason for this. 

[sandyf]

15 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

Sandy a quote from your post.

 

"The EU can only negotiate within the rules of the EU and if the UK asks to breach the rules of the EU then it is a non starter."

 

In reality the rules are meant for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men. IMHO if they absolutely stick to the rules then they are the former, and if they amend the rules then they are wise men.

 

Yes, an old service saying that normally I would recognise, but in this case I think it is the height of arrogance for the UK to expect 27 other countries to change their way of doing things to suit them, bearing in mind who did the voting to leave.

You cannot hand in your notice and expect to keep the company car.

 

Will have to agree to disagree on this one.

[sandyf]

21 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

"I said "Without agreements the UK will come to a standstill" and that is a fact. Aviation being the most obvious".

 

Are you trying to pretend that aviation within the uk will "come to a standstill" in the event of 'no deal'? 

 

As you say "it will not come to that" - so why keep posting it??

 

Are you beginning to understand why many of the electorate/posters are more than tired of 'project fear'?

Give over with the deliberate misinterpretation.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt on it being misinterpretation.

[sandyf]

16 hours ago, Grouse said:

 

What ever gave you the idea that the majority are automatically correct? 

Quite, a few times I have mentioned how the people got it wrong in the Chinese sparrow massacre, but I think it flew over the leavers heads.

[CG1 Blue]

On ‎9‎/‎15‎/‎2018 at 5:57 AM, Grouse said:

So let's vote on the terms of the final deal! I think Theresa's deal will NOT get passed by Parliament and that should be the end of it. However, because of this mess, we should indeed have a referendum to ratify parliament's decision.

I agree.  Another vote would solve this once and for all.  The questions on the ballot would be:

 

1. Leave under the terms negotiated

2. Leave with no deal

 

 

[transam]

2 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

I agree.  Another vote would solve this once and for all.  The questions on the ballot would be:

 

1. Leave under the terms negotiated

2. Leave with no deal

 

 

As if the ordinary Joe voter knew anything about deal or no deal.....?

 

Perhaps the question should be...

 

 As folk on the street, Do you like the way YOUR country is going belonging to the EU...

 

YES or NO...?

[sandyf]

19 hours ago, Sir Dude said:

WTO rules is not the end of the world and it would only be for a short time as many countries scramble to make a deal with the UK.

Why would you think that, there is not going to be anything to be gained. You can only hope that the respective countries agree to have existing arrangements rolled over, some may see it as not being worthwhile and just settle for trade with the EU.

Some have been pushing the idea that the UK can steal trade by reducing tariffs, but it is not going to happen. On 24th July the UK applied to the WTO for a schedule on the same grounds as currently exist with the EU. Should be an update by end of Oct.

 

The United Kingdom considers this notification to constitute a rectification of its concessions under the WTO, on the grounds that the schedule replicates the concessions and commitments currently applicable to the UK as an EU member. Under this process, known as the "1980 Procedures for modification and rectification of Schedules", WTO members will have three months to review the schedule, which will be considered to be approved if there are no objections from other members.

https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news18_e/mark_24jul18_e.htm

[My Thai Life]

There have been some interesting posts on CAP since I was last here.

 

The EEC/EU was from its origins shaped by the interests of French farmers and German industrialists: French farmers could charge excessive prices and receive mouthwatering subsidies, and Germany had a captive market for industrial goods.

 

This system of agricultural protectionism survives to this day, exemplified in import duties of 69 percent on beef and 26 percent for pork. Because of the CAP, European agricultural prices are, on average, around 20 percent above world market levels. This affects all EU consumers, but especially the poorest people who have to spend a large share of their income on food. There is a lot more to the CAP debate than gross or net beneficiaries.

 

This system of industrial distribution has provided Germany with the biggest trade surplus in history. This would be ok if Germany was using the Deutschmark: national currency fluctuations play a very important part in balancing international trade. But as part of the Eurozone this consigns countries like Greece to perpetual economic servitude. Currency union without political union can only end in tears.

 

Neither of these two points is simple. And well beyond the scope of the mudslinging that tends to dominate forums. And I think this is another problem with the EU (and politics in general): it’s become so complicated. The average Joe or Joanna just doesn’t have the time for it.

Edited September 17, 2018 by My Thai Life

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

I agree.  Another vote would solve this once and for all.  The questions on the ballot would be:

 

1. Leave under the terms negotiated

2. Leave with no deal

 

 

Followed by a general election

 

Labour gets in

 

Re apply for membership

 

accepted minus rebates and opt outs

 

UK joins Euro

 

Great

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, transam said:

As if the ordinary Joe voter knew anything about deal or no deal.....?

 

Perhaps the question should be...

 

 As folk on the street, Do you like the way YOUR country is going belonging to the EU...

 

YES or NO...?

Better just ask them what they want for tea

 

There was another vox pop piece on Radio 4 yesterday, Ill try and get a link

 

Do you think the BBC try to find the most moronic brexiters and give them the mic?

 

Embarrassingly badly informed people

 

Is Brexit going to bring back mining?

 

Is it going to stop immigration?

 

Why should the UK take such views into account

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Followed by a general election

 

Labour gets in

Re apply for membership

accepted minus rebates and opt outs

UK joins Euro

 

Great

More requirements if UK wishes to re-join EU

 

- UK must change it's driving direction

- Every British citizen must become bilingual 

- Hot and cold faucets must be united with a mixer

- Tee must be replaced with coffee

- Fish and chips renamed as Fish and French fries

- Spam and Marmite must be donated to the Prince of Nigeria

 

[nauseus]

48 minutes ago, oilinki said:

More requirements if UK wishes to re-join EU

 

- UK must change it's driving direction

- Every British citizen must become bilingual 

- Hot and cold faucets must be united with a mixer

- Tee must be replaced with coffee

- Fish and chips renamed as Fish and French fries

- Spam and Marmite must be donated to the Prince of Nigeria

 

It's quite a job to get a golf ball into the air off a bag of coffee - but hey - that's why we have tee caddies!

[CG1 Blue]

57 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Followed by a general election

 

Labour gets in

 

Re apply for membership

 

accepted minus rebates and opt outs

 

UK joins Euro

 

Great

Corbyn is too much of a Eurosceptic at heart to even think about re-applying.

 

And once we're out and there is no Armageddon, there will be even less public appetite to be part of the EU project.

[Grouse]

42 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Corbyn is too much of a Eurosceptic at heart to even think about re-applying.

 

And once we're out and there is no Armageddon, there will be even less public appetite to be part of the EU project.

I do hope you're right ?

[My Thai Life]

45 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Corbyn is too much of a Eurosceptic at heart to even think about re-applying.

One of the greatest ironies isn't it, the party that remainers are (still) pinning their hopes to is led by a leaver. Moreover a leaver who is completely unelectable and  whose official party policy is against a new referendum. But at least he  inspires some of the international wannabe Momentum-ites and fantasists on this thread.

 

And the party responsible for leave is led by a remainer.

 

An even bigger mystery is why posters who obviously hate the UK, and are not British, spend so much time on this thread saying the UK shouldn't leave. Maybe they are worrying that their countries' subsidies will be cut, or their ability to enjoy fish n chips will be curtailed.

Edited September 17, 2018 by My Thai Life

[Guest]

35 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

An even bigger mystery is why posters who obviously hate the UK, and are not British, spend so much time on this thread saying the UK shouldn't leave. Maybe they are worrying that their countries' subsidies will be cut, or their ability to enjoy fish n chips will be curtailed.

Remind me again, who are the two parties which are involved in Brexit. UK and Britain? 

 

For me it's quite ok that Britain leaves our union. It's stupid, but it's ok.

 

I tried fish n chips once. 

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

So imagine you’re the PM, it’s Brexit day and you don’t have a deal but you do have wads of evidence from every government department on the chaos that’s about to ensue if you leap without a deal.

 

Do you:

 

a) leap anyway and take the blame for what ensues.

b) pass it back to the public to vote on such that if they still say leap you can blame the public, if they say ditch Brexit you can blame the public.

 

???

 

It’s not such a tough choice.

[vogie]

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

So imagine you’re the PM, it’s Brexit day and you don’t have a deal but you do have wads of evidence from every government department on the chaos that’s about to ensue if you leap without a deal.

 

Do you:

 

a) leap anyway and take the blame for what ensues.

b) pass it back to the public to vote on such that if they still say leap you can blame the public, if they say ditch Brexit you can blame the public.

 

???

 

It’s not such a tough choice.

We made the choice 18 months ago, we voted to leave, have you forgot already. But should everything go belly up we will always know our American friends tried to warn us.

[Chomper Higgot]

9 minutes ago, vogie said:

We made the choice 18 months ago, we voted to leave, have you forgot already. But should everything go belly up we will always know our American friends tried to warn us.

Throwing the decision on the final deal or no deal back to the electorate is a win win for the government.

 

Whatever the majority decide, they the electorate take the blame.

 

The only people let down will be the minority.

 

 

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Well trying to make it personal on the basis of no knowledge of the facts.

Actually, I have it on good authority that they are both Australian. Well, at least the authority is as good as the one they trust in about you.

[My Thai Life]

6 hours ago, My Thai Life said:

There have been some interesting posts on CAP since I was last here.

 

The EEC/EU was from its origins shaped by the interests of French farmers and German industrialists: French farmers could charge excessive prices and receive mouthwatering subsidies, and Germany had a captive market for industrial goods.

 

This system of agricultural protectionism survives to this day, exemplified in import duties of 69 percent on beef and 26 percent for pork. Because of the CAP, European agricultural prices are, on average, around 20 percent above world market levels. This affects all EU consumers, but especially the poorest people who have to spend a large share of their income on food. There is a lot more to the CAP debate than gross or net beneficiaries.

 

This system of industrial distribution has provided Germany with the biggest trade surplus in history. This would be ok if Germany was using the Deutschmark: national currency fluctuations play a very important part in balancing international trade. But as part of the Eurozone this consigns countries like Greece to perpetual economic servitude. Currency union without political union can only end in tears.

 

Neither of these two points is simple. And well beyond the scope of the mudslinging that tends to dominate forums. And I think this is another problem with the EU (and politics in general): it’s become so complicated. The average Joe or Joanna just doesn’t have the time for it.

This is an interesting issue for people who are able to use the back button on the forum.

Edited September 17, 2018 by My Thai Life