Rebels hope to kill off May's Brexit deal in 'last-chance' vote

[soalbundy]

2 hours ago, robertson468 said:

So, if we leave with no deal, do you think that there will not be multiple businesses both in and outside the EU who will line up to do business with the UK, or will they all say "oh dear, stop business with the UK?"   Don't think so and of course our trading markets will open up considerably because we will not be hide bound by EU Law.  Sure, in the immediate term, there will be a down turn, by I strongly believe that the UK will go "hell for leather" to expand business to people who we currently cannot trade with and the Foreign Office already has people out, all over the World exploring new markets.  Sure, we can't at the moment strike up any new deals, but watch this space once we are out.  Roll on Brexit!

Zimbabwe is standing in line already

[Pique Dard]

32 minutes ago, kingdong said:

what mess the referendum was leave or stay,the majority voted leave thats democracy,feel sorry for all the failed politicians who used to cop a nice little earner as euro mps,but there you go,power to the people.

read your own comments, i quote:

 

(1) "...what mess the referendum was leave or stay"

(2) ".. Actually, apart from getting the referendum set up in the first place Nigel Farage has had nothing to do with this fiasco."

 

so well, if you don't like my wording, let's write "fiasco" instead of "mess". ok?

 

[puipuitom]

2 hours ago, malagateddy said:

Cheers for the " sunshine " bit, as I am a positive thinking hard line Brexiteer.

Born 1950..I also remember the not so good times.
I also remember red robbo .. I think that was his name..also unions demanding 25% wage increases etc etc.
NEVER AGAIN A LABOUR/MARXIST GOVT .. it is a recipe for CIVIL WAR !!!!!

 

In 1948 Churchill wanted a more united Europe, but Splendit British concentration to their Empire...

Economy in Britain did NOT went Sunshine good, even stayed behind continental Europe. see https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/11697/debt/post-war-boom/ 

Beginning 70's so catastrophal, the British started for the 3rd time negociations to join the then EEC.

see  https://www.britannica.com/place/United-Kingdom/Economy

" Postwar recovery was relatively slow, and it took nearly 40 years, with additional stimulation after 1973 from membership in the European Economic Community (ultimately succeeded by the European Union [EU]), for the British economy to improve its competitiveness significantly.  

So the Brexiteers want to return to that situation ? Good luck !  When you want to return, start re-negociations. Sign at the cross: No preferences, accept €uro, Schengen and right lane traffic.

[ravip]

And now they say this...

Press release: Despite record support for the EU, Europe’s voters fear collapse of political framework and war between member states, according to major new poll

Article

[puipuitom]

3 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

"no trariffs"?

 

But a lot of Tariffs

http://tariffdata.wto.org/ReportersAndProducts.aspx

 

You remind me of the leavers in the UK who think that leaving without deal means no change whatsoever...

The problem woth the Brexiteers… believe ONLY the words of Boris the Liar… 

[nahkit]

"When MPs come to look at that (bill), they will recognise that we have a duty in parliament to deliver on the result of the referendum and deliver Brexit," she said."

 

When will this stupid woman realise that she had a duty to deliver on the result of the referendum by March 29th?

 

[puipuitom]

1 hour ago, nontabury said:

 

Duron the referendum: 48,11% were for REMAIN. Looking at several polls since then: more-and-more British felt swindled, lied to etc and want to remain. That's why the Brexit parties do not pass the 40 %. AND THE REASON, why the Brexiteers do not want a new referendum.

[bristolboy]

6 minutes ago, ravip said:

And now they say this...

Press release: Despite record support for the EU, Europe’s voters fear collapse of political framework and war between member states, according to major new poll

Article

There's a phenomenon in polling exemplififed in this example from the USA. When polled most people say that education is in bad shape, but when asked about their local schools, most people say they're doing fine. So the opinions recorded in this poll are understandable. What isn't so understandable is why you cite it given your position on the EU:

"The survey reveals that almost 92% of voters think they would lose out if the EU collapsed, with fears about the ability to trade, travel and work in other EU countries at the top of the list. People also feared losing unity on security and defence matters and being part of a bloc that can counter the United States and China."

https://www.ecfr.eu/article/despite_record_support_eu_voters_fear_collapse_of_political_framework

[puipuitom]

52 minutes ago, Pique Dard said:

 yes, i do! the eu didn't start yesterday. plz, do read the text below! and remember the year!

 

"The Treaty of Rome brought about the creation of the European Economic Community (EEC), the best-known of the European Communities (EC). It was signed on 25 March 1957 by Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and West Germany and came into force on 1 January 1958. It remains one of the two most important treaties in the modern-day European Union (EU)"

 

The UK wanted to join in 1961. Happily Charles de Gaulle stopped them in 1963 with a second application vetoed by the French again in 1967. In  1969 , after the stepping down of Charles de Gaulle they tried again. George Brown told Willy Brandt of Germany to get the British in so "they could take over control" ( nice program yesterday on German WDR about the "British connection since 1945") . So, in 1973.. finally. And a referendum at 5 June 1975 with 67,23% in favour for a membership see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_United_Kingdom_European_Communities_membership_referendum. Since then, exactly as Charles de Gaule predicted, nothing as a frustration and sabotage of the internal EU cooperation. So, finally 2013 the first words about a re-referendum again, 2014 the promise of Cameron and.. 2016 finally the referendum see https://www.history.com/news/the-history-behind-brexit. Today, nearly 3 years later, the Brits still could not make up their minds under which conditions and.. where the borders with the EU. What a nation…

Finally... we get rid of you, British. Wish you all good luck with your exports to fabulous rich countries like Brazil, Nigeria, India, China, Russia, who are very willing to buy your prodycuts... if competative with what they can make and in line what they can afford.

And enjoy when in a line for a Schengen visa..

 

 

[billd766]

43 minutes ago, puipuitom said:

In 1948 Churchill wanted a more united Europe, but Splendit British concentration to their Empire...

Economy in Britain did NOT went Sunshine good, even stayed behind continental Europe. see https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/11697/debt/post-war-boom/ 

Beginning 70's so catastrophal, the British started for the 3rd time negociations to join the then EEC.

see  https://www.britannica.com/place/United-Kingdom/Economy

" Postwar recovery was relatively slow, and it took nearly 40 years, with additional stimulation after 1973 from membership in the European Economic Community (ultimately succeeded by the European Union [EU]), for the British economy to improve its competitiveness significantly.  

So the Brexiteers want to return to that situation ? Good luck !  When you want to return, start re-negociations. Sign at the cross: No preferences, accept €uro, Schengen and right lane traffic.

After WW2 the UK repaid its debts to the USA. That took until 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/6215847.stm

 

Germany didn't have to repay anything and their industries were rebuilt from the ground up. The Marshall plan helped Europe a lot.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan

 

The Marshall Plan (officially the European Recovery Program, ERP) was an American initiative passed in 1948 to aid Western Europe, in which the United States gave over $12 billion[1] (nearly $100 billion in 2018 US dollars)[2] in economic assistance to help rebuild Western European economies after the end of World War II. Replacing the previous Morgenthau Plan, it operated for four years beginning on April 3, 1948.[3] The goals of the United States were to rebuild war-torn regions, remove trade barriers, modernize industry, improve European prosperity, and prevent the spread of Communism.[4] The Marshall Plan required a reduction of interstate barriers, a dropping of many regulations, and encouraged an increase in productivity, as well as the adoption of modern business procedures.[5]

 

Can you see the difference?

[puipuitom]

25 minutes ago, billd766 said:

After WW2 the UK repaid its debts to the USA. That took until 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk/6215847.stm

 

Germany didn't have to repay anything and their industries were rebuilt from the ground up. The Marshall plan helped Europe a lot.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan

 

The Marshall Plan (officially the European Recovery Program, ERP) was an American initiative passed in 1948 to aid Western Europe, in which the United States gave over $12 billion[1] (nearly $100 billion in 2018 US dollars)[2] in economic assistance to help rebuild Western European economies after the end of World War II. Replacing the previous Morgenthau Plan, it operated for four years beginning on April 3, 1948.[3] The goals of the United States were to rebuild war-torn regions, remove trade barriers, modernize industry, improve European prosperity, and prevent the spread of Communism.[4] The Marshall Plan required a reduction of interstate barriers, a dropping of many regulations, and encouraged an increase in productivity, as well as the adoption of modern business procedures.[5]

 

Can you see the difference?

Time to learn to read and search on Internet: see 

and  http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Marshall_Plan  

Had that been the case, other countries such as Great Britain and France (which both received more economic assistance than Germany) should have experienced the same phenomenon. In fact, the amount of monetary aid received by Germany through the Marshall Plan was by far overshadowed by the amount the Germans meanwhile had to pay as reparations and by the charges the Allies made on the Germans for the cost of occupation ($2.4 billion per year). Germany paid the U.S. back in installments (the last check was handed over in June 1971)

 

And: https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/18337/was-the-aid-in-the-marshall-plan-a-loan 

The Marshall Plan [...] consisted of aid both in the form of grants and in the form of loans. Out of the total, 1.2 billion USD were loan-aid.

Since the total economic support the program involved was of $13 billion in contemporaneous time (roughly $132 billion in Sept 2017 money), only 10% approx of the aid was in form of loans.

The UK received 385 million USD of its Marshall Plan aid in the form of loans. Unconnected to the Marshall Plan the UK also received direct loans from the US amounting to 4.6 billion USD. The proportion of Marshall Plan loans versus Marshall Plan grants was roughly 15% to 85% for both the UK and France.

The last payment of these loans by the UK government was done in 2006. Apparently, the last payment from the French occured in 1962.

Germany, which up until the 1953 Debt agreement had to work on the assumption that all the Marshall Plan aid was to be repaid, spent its funds very carefully. Payment for Marshall Plan goods, "counterpart funds", were administered by the Reconstruction Credit Institute, which used the funds for loans inside Germany. In the 1953 Debt agreement the amount of Marshall plan aid that Germany was to repay was reduced to less than 1 billion USD. This made the proportion of loans versus grants to Germany similar to that of France and the UK. The final German loan repayment was made in 1971.

[malagateddy]

Sorry, my English is less as from a Native Brit. I have the advantage I also speak my native Dutch, fluent German ( won a bet from a german I am NON a German), French and a little Italian. Yesterday evening at German WDR -TV I heard for the first time a Brit - after 30 years stationed in Germany - who could speak reasonable another language… for 40 % of so... How good is your non-British language knowledge ? 

For Netherlands.. yes, we will have some disadvantages for our fresh fruit and vegetable exports, but a LOT of advantages seen all British companies already settling in into NL and around. For instance the EU Medicine Agency and.. soon the production of the Mini in Borne. Suits very well in the parts and components exchange between Belgium, Germany and Netherlands.  I must confess: a Gift of the Gods. Beyong any dreans before 2016. That approx. 1 % EU contribution ( inclusive a lot what is done together like food safety reaearch and contol under EFSA and RASFF you have to do soon alone) – call it “commission” - we are very willing to pay for all the advantages.

Corrupt… I would rather call some British Parliament members.
Thanks to EU subsidies quite some areas of the Eastern member states are now able to work together with the Western states. See for instance how many Western origin factories work there now. Soon.. with the labourers, who do now the dirty jobs in UK. Wish you good luck with strawberry picking next season.

I do not pick strawberries[emoji6]
At school..I dropped foreign languages to study other subjects.
You are very welcome to all the immigrants from the eastern eu states..in the UK..the crime rate is UP due to some eastern eu state immigrants being involved in the horrible stuff.
That is..child prostitution..forced marriages..hard drugs..protection rackets etc.

Me..the quicker the UK leaves the economically sinking eu ... the better.
Have a nice evening.

Ps..it will be great fun watching the diehard eu federalists pull their hair out or pull their wigs off when all the populist parties run amok in a couple of weeks.

Vive the afD, the french rally..and all the rest.[emoji6][emoji6][emoji6]

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[metisdead]

Some troll posts and replies have been removed. 

[nontabury]

2 hours ago, Pique Dard said:

 yes, i do! the eu didn't start yesterday. plz, do read the text below! and remember the year!

 

"The Treaty of Rome brought about the creation of the European Economic Community (EEC), the best-known of the European Communities (EC). It was signed on 25 March 1957 by Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and West Germany and came into force on 1 January 1958. It remains one of the two most important treaties in the modern-day European Union (EU)"

 

 

 

And many supporters on these threads voted in the 1975 referendum to join a trading union called the EEC. Later we found that we had been lied and conned, and had to witness it transforming into the E.u.

without the people being given a opportunity to vote on the issue until 2016,when as you well know, at the largest Democratic vote in our history 

They voted by a majority of over one million to leave this so called union.

 Get over it, and accept the electorates decision.

 

 

[evadgib]

'Of course I'm going for it': Boris Johnson says he WILL stand for Tory leader as May faces demands to quit now to save the party from Brexit disaster

[nontabury]

1 hour ago, puipuitom said:

Duron the referendum: 48,11% were for REMAIN. Looking at several polls since then: more-and-more British felt swindled, lied to etc and want to remain. That's why the Brexit parties do not pass the 40 %. AND THE REASON, why the Brexiteers do not want a new referendum.

 

I take it your not British, or if you are, you do not live in the U.K. otherwise you would realise how wrong your conclusion, is on the intentions of the British people regarding this issue.

 

 

Edited May 16, 2019 by nontabury

[puipuitom]

25 minutes ago, nontabury said:

And many supporters on these threads voted in the 1975 referendum to join a trading union called the EEC. Later we found that we had been lied and conned, and had to witness it transforming into the E.u.

And with EVERY step, a British (prime) minister agreed completely.

[billd766]

3 hours ago, Pique Dard said:

read your own comments, i quote:

 

(1) "...what mess the referendum was leave or stay"

(2) ".. Actually, apart from getting the referendum set up in the first place Nigel Farage has had nothing to do with this fiasco."

 

so well, if you don't like my wording, let's write "fiasco" instead of "mess". ok?

 

Comment #2 was mine and not kingdong's.

[billd766]

3 hours ago, puipuitom said:

In 1948 Churchill wanted a more united Europe, but Splendit British concentration to their Empire...

Economy in Britain did NOT went Sunshine good, even stayed behind continental Europe. see https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/11697/debt/post-war-boom/ 

Beginning 70's so catastrophal, the British started for the 3rd time negociations to join the then EEC.

see  https://www.britannica.com/place/United-Kingdom/Economy

" Postwar recovery was relatively slow, and it took nearly 40 years, with additional stimulation after 1973 from membership in the European Economic Community (ultimately succeeded by the European Union [EU]), for the British economy to improve its competitiveness significantly.  

So the Brexiteers want to return to that situation ? Good luck !  When you want to return, start re-negociations. Sign at the cross: No preferences, accept €uro, Schengen and right lane traffic.

Congratulations on your promotion to becoming the new EU speaker.

 

Are you having a party to celebrate?

1 hour ago, puipuitom said:

Time to learn to read and search on Internet: see 

and  http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Marshall_Plan  

Had that been the case, other countries such as Great Britain and France (which both received more economic assistance than Germany) should have experienced the same phenomenon. In fact, the amount of monetary aid received by Germany through the Marshall Plan was by far overshadowed by the amount the Germans meanwhile had to pay as reparations and by the charges the Allies made on the Germans for the cost of occupation ($2.4 billion per year). Germany paid the U.S. back in installments (the last check was handed over in June 1971)

 

And: https://economics.stackexchange.com/questions/18337/was-the-aid-in-the-marshall-plan-a-loan 

The Marshall Plan [...] consisted of aid both in the form of grants and in the form of loans. Out of the total, 1.2 billion USD were loan-aid.

Since the total economic support the program involved was of $13 billion in contemporaneous time (roughly $132 billion in Sept 2017 money), only 10% approx of the aid was in form of loans.

The UK received 385 million USD of its Marshall Plan aid in the form of loans. Unconnected to the Marshall Plan the UK also received direct loans from the US amounting to 4.6 billion USD. The proportion of Marshall Plan loans versus Marshall Plan grants was roughly 15% to 85% for both the UK and France.

The last payment of these loans by the UK government was done in 2006. Apparently, the last payment from the French occured in 1962.

Germany, which up until the 1953 Debt agreement had to work on the assumption that all the Marshall Plan aid was to be repaid, spent its funds very carefully. Payment for Marshall Plan goods, "counterpart funds", were administered by the Reconstruction Credit Institute, which used the funds for loans inside Germany. In the 1953 Debt agreement the amount of Marshall plan aid that Germany was to repay was reduced to less than 1 billion USD. This made the proportion of loans versus grants to Germany similar to that of France and the UK. The final German loan repayment was made in 1971.

It is a strange thing about loans.

 

They have to be paid back, usually with interest.

[billd766]

1 hour ago, puipuitom said:

And with EVERY step, a British (prime) minister agreed completely.

Absolutely.

 

It was however, a politician who agreed, and NOT the UK electorate who never actually got to vote on the decision.

 

That is why Teresa May and the Tory party, plus of course Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour party are so reviled by the UK electorate.

 

Would I trust a politician of the 2 major  minor parties in the UK? About as far as I could throw all of them with the little finger of my left hand.

 

BTW I am right handed.

[rickudon]

So, what will happen after a hard Brexit ...... Well, currently 44% of our exports go to the EU (exact figure is irrelevant, it is what happens to it). After leaving (assuming exchange rate initially stays the same) Those companies who buy British will review the need to do so - economics is what counts. There will now be customs declarations, tariffs etc. and potentially harder to provide just in time logistics. So some companies will find more economic sources of products, probably elsewhere within the EU. So UK exports to EU will fall (unless the GBP is devalued, like immediately after referendum, so making British goods cheaper). 

 

So UK now has unsold production to shift. This would need to find new markets. We will compete against EU countries (who may have a trade deal and therefore lower tariffs), the USA, Japan and China. These 4 entities will be our main competitors. We will have gained no advantage over them due to leaving the EU. We will need to provide a better deal (different standards. lower prices). They were not buying before, so it will be an uphill struggle to sell to them - unless we can provide better, cheaper products. So we can expect UK output to fall at first .... we hope only at first .....

 

Now tell me why a country should start buying our products instead of another countries. What has changed? Maybe we do a deal to import their products, which we couldn't before because they didn't meet EU standards. Never mind, UK can now lower their standards. Some of these products may compete with UK producers and erode their market share.

 

So we have declining sales, lower prices, and lower quality products on sale in the UK. British companies now have to reduce costs - GBP devaluation or wage cuts. I think more Argentina than Zimbabwe, but who knows where it ends!

 

Oh and i forgot to mention that some services (80% of GDP) may no longer be able to be sold to EU countries, How much, do not know, but it can only go down.

 

But who cares about this, no professional EU bureaucrats running things, our own amateur politicians will make decisions instead! And we can see how good they are .....

[baboon]

1 hour ago, rickudon said:

So, what will happen after a hard Brexit ...... Well, currently 44% of our exports go to the EU (exact figure is irrelevant, it is what happens to it). After leaving (assuming exchange rate initially stays the same) Those companies who buy British will review the need to do so - economics is what counts. There will now be customs declarations, tariffs etc. and potentially harder to provide just in time logistics. So some companies will find more economic sources of products, probably elsewhere within the EU. So UK exports to EU will fall (unless the GBP is devalued, like immediately after referendum, so making British goods cheaper). 

 

So UK now has unsold production to shift. This would need to find new markets. We will compete against EU countries (who may have a trade deal and therefore lower tariffs), the USA, Japan and China. These 4 entities will be our main competitors. We will have gained no advantage over them due to leaving the EU. We will need to provide a better deal (different standards. lower prices). They were not buying before, so it will be an uphill struggle to sell to them - unless we can provide better, cheaper products. So we can expect UK output to fall at first .... we hope only at first .....

 

Now tell me why a country should start buying our products instead of another countries. What has changed? Maybe we do a deal to import their products, which we couldn't before because they didn't meet EU standards. Never mind, UK can now lower their standards. Some of these products may compete with UK producers and erode their market share.

 

So we have declining sales, lower prices, and lower quality products on sale in the UK. British companies now have to reduce costs - GBP devaluation or wage cuts. I think more Argentina than Zimbabwe, but who knows where it ends!

 

Oh and i forgot to mention that some services (80% of GDP) may no longer be able to be sold to EU countries, How much, do not know, but it can only go down.

 

But who cares about this, no professional EU bureaucrats running things, our own amateur politicians will make decisions instead! And we can see how good they are .....

'But.. But.. Dunno. I just want my BREXIT!' (Another page of memes to follow...)

[CG1 Blue]

1 hour ago, rickudon said:

So, what will happen after a hard Brexit ...... Well, currently 44% of our exports go to the EU (exact figure is irrelevant, it is what happens to it). After leaving (assuming exchange rate initially stays the same) Those companies who buy British will review the need to do so - economics is what counts. There will now be customs declarations, tariffs etc. and potentially harder to provide just in time logistics. So some companies will find more economic sources of products, probably elsewhere within the EU. So UK exports to EU will fall (unless the GBP is devalued, like immediately after referendum, so making British goods cheaper). 

 

So UK now has unsold production to shift. This would need to find new markets. We will compete against EU countries (who may have a trade deal and therefore lower tariffs), the USA, Japan and China. These 4 entities will be our main competitors. We will have gained no advantage over them due to leaving the EU. We will need to provide a better deal (different standards. lower prices). They were not buying before, so it will be an uphill struggle to sell to them - unless we can provide better, cheaper products. So we can expect UK output to fall at first .... we hope only at first .....

 

Now tell me why a country should start buying our products instead of another countries. What has changed? Maybe we do a deal to import their products, which we couldn't before because they didn't meet EU standards. Never mind, UK can now lower their standards. Some of these products may compete with UK producers and erode their market share.

 

So we have declining sales, lower prices, and lower quality products on sale in the UK. British companies now have to reduce costs - GBP devaluation or wage cuts. I think more Argentina than Zimbabwe, but who knows where it ends!

 

Oh and i forgot to mention that some services (80% of GDP) may no longer be able to be sold to EU countries, How much, do not know, but it can only go down.

 

But who cares about this, no professional EU bureaucrats running things, our own amateur politicians will make decisions instead! And we can see how good they are .....

A decent summary of the worst case scenario, excluding any positive impacts of leaving the EU, and ignoring countless other possible permutations. Even in a hard (= real) Brexit the EU and the UK would implement emergency arrangements immediately to reduce the impact on both sides. Of course they're not going to admit this whilst negotiations are ongoing. 

Article 24 under WTO would be a formal way of doing this, giving both sides 2-10 years to work things out. 

 

It should also be noted that something like 5% of UK companies trade with the EU, meaning that 95% of UK businesses do not trade with the EU. 

[Nigel Garvie]

15 hours ago, malagateddy said:

Eric Clapton..those were the days

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Indeed for me the best rock band to come out of the 60s. Stevie Windwood was a genius, and Clapton a pretty good guitar player. The joint lead guitar solo on "Had to cry today" is truly amazing. We now find out that the whole album was done with just one or two takes, not the weeks of sound engineer massaging in the studio that often replaces raw talent nowadays.

Damn it I've gone and agreed with a Rangers supporting Unionist again, that's twice now, how the heck did that happen!

[impulse]

17 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

17 hours ago, Morch said:

Very Star Warsy, that headline.

Star Wars made more sense.

 

Not the one with Jar Jar Binx.

 

[impulse]

2 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

It should also be noted that something like 5% of UK companies trade with the EU, meaning that 95% of UK businesses do not trade with the EU. 

 

That's one of those statistics that, while maybe being true, is misleading.  I'll use my home state of Texas for an example.

 

Over 95% of companies in Texas do not produce oil.

 

But a huge portion of them sell equipment to oil companies, truck freight around for oil companies, cut hair and flip burgers for oilfield people, and build homes and loan money to oilfield people.  You get the picture

 

So, though most of the companies aren't oil producing companies, if Texas ran out of oil tomorrow, it would be a catastrophe.

 

Maybe only 5% of the UK companies trade with the EU, but how many employees do they have, how many people build their homes and loan them money to buy those homes, and how many people work for companies that sell materials and provide services to those 5%?

 

[CG1 Blue]

9 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

That's one of those statistics that, while maybe being true, is misleading.  I'll use my home state of Texas for an example.

 

Over 95% of companies in Texas do not produce oil.

 

But a huge portion of them sell equipment to oil companies, truck freight around for oil companies, cut hair and flip burgers for oilfield people, and build homes and loan money to oilfield people.  You get the picture

 

So, though most of the companies aren't oil producing companies, if Texas ran out of oil tomorrow, it would be a catastrophe.

 

Maybe only 5% of the UK companies trade with the EU, but how many employees do they have, how many people build their homes and loan them money to buy those homes, and how many people work for companies that sell materials and provide services to those 5%?

 

You tell me. You're simply proving that nothing is black and white, so those painting a picture of doom are also not considering all factors. 

[OneMoreFarang]

3 hours ago, impulse said:

20 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

20 hours ago, Morch said:

Very Star Warsy, that headline.

Star Wars made more sense.

Not the one with Jar Jar Binx.

That was not Star Wars anymore. I - III was Star Wars. ???? 

[Morch]

2 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

That was not Star Wars anymore. I - III was Star Wars. ???? 

 

Now that's an argument on par with "Brexit: yes or no".

[tomacht8]

7 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

- snip-

It should also be noted that something like 5% of UK companies trade with the EU, meaning that 95% of UK businesses do not trade with the EU. 

SME are Micro, small and medium sized.
In the UK 89,3 % from all enterprises are micro sized. These are, for example, all hairdressers, small craftsmen, tax consultants and all small self-employed. And 8.8% are small enterprises.
These company size classes are not at all affected by EU regulations.

The situation is different for the medium (1,5%) and large (0,4%) size classes.

Inform your self how many people are employed in the respective company size classes.

Then you would better understand the scope of Brexit with regard to the number of employees affected.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06152/SN06152.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjSg7WovqHiAhWZknAKHSFBBzAQFjAAegQIBRAC&usg=AOvVaw0Z9h4H6kJ53K0vWkS_ZoJD&cshid=1558059085307

Edited May 17, 2019 by tomacht8