Delay Brexit? I'd rather be dead in a ditch, says PM Johnson

[sanemax]

6 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 Call it a rebate, correction, abatement even discount if you want to (as can be seen from @bristolboy's links, most people, including HMG and the EU, usually use rebate); the fact is @Forethat's attempted explanation of it and dismissal of it was completely incorrect.

 

Tell us, do you honestly believe that if we were to leave the EU and then in a few years time go back to the EU cap in hand pleading to be allowed back in that they would agree to us receiving this money, whatever you wish to call it, once more?

 

BTW,  I did not suggest that any one was intellectually lacking. What I did suggest was that two members should do some research and fact checking before posting in order to avoid embarrassment. The words "intellectually lacking" are yours, not mine.

thanks , but i am well aware what words are mine and which words are not , no need to tell me which is which , as i did write them and if 8i foget , i can scroll back and have a look what i wrote

  we all know what and how much it is , no need to discuss the best fitting word

[7by7]

15 minutes ago, Thairealist said:

So why are you so afraid of allowing the British people to decide at a General Election. Could it be that you know the result would not be to your liking.

 I am not afraid of a GE, but worry about the timing. We can't trust Johnson to stick to his word and hold it on the 15th October. If he gets his election I fully expect him to move the date to November so he can go ahead with his plans without the approval of Parliament.

 

So let's get no deal removed by Parliament and then we can have the election.

 

Furthermore, I do not belive a GE would let us British people decide on Brexit; as I explained at length earlier in the topic; 

So why are so you afraid of letting us British people decide the future of Brexit, and our country, in a final, legally binding referendum?

 

Could it be that you know the result would not be to your liking?

[7by7]

4 minutes ago, sanemax said:

thanks , but i am well aware what words are mine and which words are not , no need to tell me which is which , as i did write them and if 8i foget , i can scroll back and have a look what i wrote

 Just as I know the meaning of words, yet you felt compelled to write that you had to explain them to me!

 

6 minutes ago, sanemax said:

we all know what and how much it is , no need to discuss the best fitting word

So what was the point of your earlier post in which you did just that?

 

No need to answer, we all know why you did it and we can all see that you failed.

 

[7by7]

10 minutes ago, Forethat said:

To be honest I'd be happy to debate this topic if you could only exercise just a fraction of decency and provide evidence as to exactly where you think I am wrong.

 

You haven't. And you'd struggle to do so, I might add.

 

Typical remainer - provides absolute no evidence.

 

Pathetic.

 I did not provide evidence because @bristolboy had already done just that.

 

So instead I referred you to his post. 

 

This post: 

 

Typical Brexiteer, ignores the evidence which proves them wrong!

 

 

Edited September 7, 2019 by 7by7
Addendum

[Forethat]

11 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 I did not provide evidence because @bristolboy had already done just that.

No he didn't. 

[Sujo]

7 minutes ago, Forethat said:

No he didn't. 

Yes he did. And he did it well.

[7by7]

8 minutes ago, Forethat said:

No he didn't. 

 He did, but as usual for a Brexiteer you choose the myth over the reality. 

 

He provided links and quotes to back up his explanation; where are yours?

[Sujo]

31 minutes ago, Forethat said:

To be honest I'd be happy to debate this topic if you could only exercise just a fraction of decency and provide evidence as to exactly where you think I am wrong.

 

You haven't. And you'd struggle to do so, I might add.

 

Typical remainer - provides absolute no evidence.

 

Pathetic.

You ask for decency then label a remainer pathetic. Mmmm

Edited September 7, 2019 by Sujo

[Forethat]

1 minute ago, Sujo said:

Yes he did. And he did it well.

No he didn't. He's not even touching on the subject. His so called "evidence" is the equivalent of referring to the price of a pound of pork to justify the distance in miles between Edinburgh and Northampton.  

[SheungWan]

 
 So why are you so afraid of allowing the British people to decide at a General Election. Could it be that you know the result would not be to your liking.
 
[/url]  
 

I'm afraid of running an election before October 31 because Boris Johnson is totally untrustworthy.

Sent from my SM-N935F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Forethat]

3 minutes ago, Sujo said:

You ask for decency then label a remainer pathetic. Mmmm

How about stop throwing dead cats on the table and start providing some evidence when you claim others are wrong.

[7by7]

2 minutes ago, Forethat said:

No he didn't. He's not even touching on the subject. His so called "evidence" is the equivalent of referring to the price of a pound of pork to justify the distance in miles between Edinburgh and Northampton.  

 More evidence that denial isn't just a river in Egypt!

[oldhippy]

11 minutes ago, Forethat said:

For those of you who fail to comprehend the EU membership fee "rebate" given to the UK.

 

In a nutshell:

 

1. The EU decides to base the membership fee on population in combination with the percentage of the country's sea and ocean borders

2. The EU decides that half the entire budget will be focused on supporting agriculture via subsidies

3. Austria, Luxembourg and Germany says "I like it"

4. France thinks "well, sounds a bit unfair but as almost half of the budget will be focused on agriculture we'll getting our hands on most of the budget anyway

6. UK says "hang on now, no freaking chance, we'll be paying more than anyone else and get less subsidies than anyone - no way"

7. EU says "ok, we'll change the way the fee is calculated, but only for you"

 

 

Result: Incompetent and ignorant remoaners is on the floor screaming "uuuaaahhh, uuuuaaahhhhh, <deleted> hlel, UK gets a rebate, we're paying LESS than other countries" IT'S NOT FAIR!

 

 

QUOTE: The EU decides to base the membership fee on population in combination with the percentage of the country's sea and ocean borders

 

SHAMELESS!!!!!

I think this post should be deleted. Not because of a difference in opinion, but because this is simply a lie, based on nothing.

Not even a credible lie: ....the sea and ocean borders.... Give us a break, if you want to tell lies, at least come up with something remotebly believable.

 

55555555 the sea borders........ 5555555

 

[7by7]

2 minutes ago, Forethat said:

How about stop throwing dead cats on the table and start providing some evidence when you claim others are wrong.

 Where is your evidence to prove @bristolboy wrong?

 

Where is the evidence to back up your nonsense about sea and ocean borders etc.?

[oldhippy]

27 minutes ago, Forethat said:

For those of you who fail to comprehend the EU membership fee "rebate" given to the UK.

 

In a nutshell:

 

1. The EU decides to base the membership fee on population in combination with the percentage of the country's sea and ocean borders

2. The EU decides that half the entire budget will be focused on supporting agriculture via subsidies

3. Austria, Luxembourg and Germany says "I like it"

4. France thinks "well, sounds a bit unfair but as almost half of the budget will be focused on agriculture we'll getting our hands on most of the budget anyway

6. UK says "hang on now, no freaking chance, we'll be paying more than anyone else and get less subsidies than anyone - no way"

7. EU says "ok, we'll change the way the fee is calculated, but only for you"

 

 

Result: Incompetent and ignorant remoaners is on the floor screaming "uuuaaahhh, uuuuaaahhhhh, <deleted> hlel, UK gets a rebate, we're paying LESS than other countries" IT'S NOT FAIR!

 

 

I thought that the funniest (and unbeatable) post by a brexiteer was when somebody lectured a Dutch poster about the difference between British and English,  then went on to ask if this is not thought in his country's schools, but mixing up The Neatherlands and Holland. (same same 555)

 

But EU contributions based on shoreline?????????????????

If the mods don't give you a holliday, than take one yourself. You need it.

 

Anyway, thanks for a good 555555555555555555555555555555555.

 

 

[oldhippy]

Somebody did a runner.......

[sirineou]

3 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Typical Brexiteer, ignores the evidence which proves them wrong!

IMO you are absolutely right.

also IMO it is an understandable reaction on the part of the brexit crowd. and if the dynamics that brought the UK and is bringing many other countries to this impasse are to be mitigated, they first need to be understood. 

Though it might  seem as such, racism and stupidity (though the have a part to play) is not a primary motivator in the xenophobia and economic dislocation that IMO is fueling the brexit attitude.

  People in a particular country via numerous social interactions develop a dominant culture that works for them with in that dominant culture there are subcultures. Interactions between the dominant culture, the subcultures and external cultures slowly and inperseptably  always changes culture. It usually happens at such slow rate and scale that it goes unnoticed and it seems to each to be by their own choice even though it is not. They are not racists, and are not stupid, simply frustrated and unfortunately uneducated on the subject. 

When they are called racists or stupid they understandably become defensive because they don't believe they are either of these things and IMO they are right.

What we are seeing now is the failure of the socioeconomic system used in the past couple of hundred years.

We have not settled in a new system, still trying to make the old system work.   . and will not for a while settled in a new system.

We are in a state of flux. With in a state of flux there is a lot of movement and consequently a lot of interaction and friction. Thus rapid cultural change.

This change is not slow, imperceptible and does not seem like it is by choice.People understandably react to it , but their reaction is not directed toward the forces that cause the change, their reaction are directed toward the friction point, because that's what they see. People want to build Walls,and retreat to the mythology of the past.

And then there those smart operators that know exactly what is happening, but being sociopaths want to use the dynamic for personal gain. 

Unfortunately there is only one way and it is forward. 

I promise you one thing, The problem will get worse before it gets better. Only one thing to do, keep talking about it in rational terms,as you do but don't disparage those on the other side, Try to understand their frustration,see where they are coming from, and hopefully convert some of them to the side of progress  .

I apologise about the simplistic explanation, ( I could write tomes about it)but this is not the venue for it, and apologise if it sounded pedantic , not my intent. I am sure you have thought in some of the same terms.  

   

 

[bannork]

19 minutes ago, sirineou said:

IMO you are absolutely right.

also IMO it is an understandable reaction on the part of the brexit crowd. and if the dynamics that brought the UK and is bringing many other countries to this impasse are to be mitigated, they first need to be understood. 

Though it might  seem as such, racism and stupidity (though the have a part to play) is not a primary motivator in the xenophobia and economic dislocation that IMO is fueling the brexit attitude.

  People in a particular country via numerous social interactions develop a dominant culture that works for them with in that dominant culture there are subcultures. Interactions between the dominant culture, the subcultures and external cultures slowly and inperseptably  always changes culture. It usually happens at such slow rate and scale that it goes unnoticed and it seems to each to be by their own choice even though it is not. They are not racists, and are not stupid, simply frustrated and unfortunately uneducated on the subject. 

When they are called racists or stupid they understandably become defensive because they don't believe they are either of these things and IMO they are right.

What we are seeing now is the failure of the socioeconomic system used in the past couple of hundred years.

We have not settled in a new system, still trying to make the old system work.   . and will not for a while settled in a new system.

We are in a state of flux. With in a state of flux there is a lot of movement and consequently a lot of interaction and friction. Thus rapid cultural change.

This change is not slow, imperceptible and does not seem like it is by choice.People understandably react to it , but their reaction is not directed toward the forces that cause the change, their reaction are directed toward the friction point, because that's what they see. People want to build Walls,and retreat to the mythology of the past.

And then there those smart operators that know exactly what is happening, but being sociopaths want to use the dynamic for personal gain. 

Unfortunately there is only one way and it is forward. 

I promise you one thing, The problem will get worse before it gets better. Only one thing to do, keep talking about it in rational terms,as you do but don't disparage those on the other side, Try to understand their frustration,see where they are coming from, and hopefully convert some of them to the side of progress  .

I apologise about the simplistic explanation, ( I could write tomes about it)but this is not the venue for it, and apologise if it sounded pedantic , not my intent. I am sure you have thought in some of the same terms.  

   

 

A very good post. When Hilary called the white trash the 'deplorables' it didn't do her any good at all.

It's no good playing PC, being patronizing and dismissive, and calling people racist when they criticize immigration.

The leaders often are psychos but they'll only find an audience if their calls resonate with the people.

 

 

Edited September 7, 2019 by bannork

[DannyCarlton]

4 hours ago, Thairealist said:

 

What manufacturing capacity? Have you not noticed that over the last 30yrs much of it has already been transferred to Eastern Europe, much to the detriment of our own workers. And to add salt to the wound, we have been paying for this economic catastrophe through our charitable contributions to Brussels.

And who's idea was that? Thatcher's!

[Forethat]

2 hours ago, oldhippy said:

I thought that the funniest (and unbeatable) post by a brexiteer was when somebody lectured a Dutch poster about the difference between British and English,  then went on to ask if this is not thought in his country's schools, but mixing up The Neatherlands and Holland. (same same 555)

 

But EU contributions based on shoreline?????????????????

If the mods don't give you a holliday, than take one yourself. You need it.

 

Anyway, thanks for a good 555555555555555555555555555555555.

 

 

Note to self: whenever you think about using an analogy in the presence of a remainer....don't. They just wont get it.

[Slip]

3 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Note to self: whenever you think about using an analogy in the presence of a remainer....don't. They just wont get it.

Your note to self should say. "Don't offer an inaccurate summary/ precis of a situation to make a political point, and for your own credibility learn what an analogy is".

[Forethat]

2 hours ago, oldhippy said:

QUOTE: The EU decides to base the membership fee on population in combination with the percentage of the country's sea and ocean borders

 

SHAMELESS!!!!!

I think this post should be deleted. Not because of a difference in opinion, but because this is simply a lie, based on nothing.

Not even a credible lie: ....the sea and ocean borders.... Give us a break, if you want to tell lies, at least come up with something remotebly believable.

 

55555555 the sea borders........ 5555555

 

I didn't expect you to appreciate the analogy, so please feel free to replace the sentence "sea and ocean borders" with "VAT base" and "GNP" and it'll all come to you. Or. maybe not.

 

Quote

 

In April 1970 the six founding member states of the then European Communities (EC) adopted the so-called 'own resources system'[5] as the means of funding the EC budget. Under this system, revenues were to flow automatically to the EC budget rather than through agreement of the national parliaments, as had been the case until then, and calculated based on three elements:

• Customs duties collected on imports from the rest of the world
• Agricultural resources
• VAT base.

As the UK's VAT base in comparison with gross national product (GNP) was proportionally higher than in other member states, and the UK was more open than other member states to trade with non-EC countries, this system implied a disproportionate contribution by the UK when it joined the EEC in 1973. Additionally, the fact that around 70 per cent of the EC budget[6] was used to finance the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and that the UK had a small agricultural sector meant that the UK gained few receipts under the EEC's redistributive policies.

 

It's not a rebate. Trust me. I know this. The problem here is you don't. They've simply NAMED the exception "rebate", when in fact it's a "justification".

 

Ok, hun!?

 

[7by7]

9 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Note to self: whenever you think about using an analogy in the presence of a remainer....don't. They just wont get it.

 So are you now admitting that your 'sea and ocean borders' post was complete pony?

 

How about your previous 'there is no rebate' post which that absurdity tried to justify? Admitting that was pony as well?

 

It has, after all, been proven as such.

 

Sorry, but your feeble "it was an analogy" excuse simply doesn't wash given the vehemence with which you previously defended your comments!

 

 

[Forethat]

11 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 So are you now admitting that your 'sea and ocean borders' post was complete pony?

 

How about your previous 'there is no rebate' post which that absurdity tried to justify? Admitting that was pony as well?

 

It has, after all, been proven as such.

 

Sorry, but your feeble "it was an analogy" excuse simply doesn't wash given the vehemence with which you previously defended your comments!

 

 

In case you're interested in debating the topic (I assume you're not) I have previously explained exactly WHY UK is subject to an exception when calculating the EU budget contribution. The explanation involved VAT and GNP. I guess you didn't notice that either. 

 

*facepalm*

Edited September 7, 2019 by Forethat

[7by7]

8 minutes ago, Forethat said:

I didn't expect you to appreciate the analogy, so please feel free to replace the sentence "sea and ocean borders" with "VAT base" and "GNP" and it'll all come to you. Or. maybe not.

 

It's not a rebate. Trust me. I know this. The problem here is you don't. They've simply NAMED the exception "rebate", when in fact it's a "justification".

 

Ok, hun!?

 

Your source, this Wikipedia article continues

Quote

To address this, at the Fontainebleau European Council in June 1984 Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher successfully negotiated the UK Rebate which was adopted in the May 1985 European Council decision.^[2] It has been in place ever since.

 

It is, of course, completely understandable why you didn't want anyone to read that bit so left the link out of your post.

 

It's a rebate (or whichever synonym @sanemax prefers), it was negotiated by Thatcher in 1984 and began in 1985.  

[7by7]

7 minutes ago, Forethat said:

11 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 So are you now admitting that your 'sea and ocean borders' post was complete pony?

 

How about your previous 'there is no rebate' post which that absurdity tried to justify? Admitting that was pony as well?

 

It has, after all, been proven as such.

 

Sorry, but your feeble "it was an analogy" excuse simply doesn't wash given the vehemence with which you previously defended your comments!

 

 

*facepalm*

 QED.

[7by7]

11 minutes ago, Forethat said:

In case you're interested in debating the topic (I assume you're not) I have previously explained exactly WHY UK is subject to an exception when calculating the EU budget contribution. The explanation involved VAT and GNP. I guess you didn't notice that either. 

 

*facepalm*

Edited 1 minute ago by Forethat

 Hmm; editing a post after it's been quoted.

 

Is that allowed?

 

It's certainly a very cheap trick.

[beautifulthailand99]

Some wonderful pro-Brexit supporters live in London 

 

 

Edited September 7, 2019 by beautifulthailand99

[Forethat]

4 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

It's a rebate (or whichever synonym @sanemax prefers), it was negotiated by Thatcher in 1984 and began in 1985.  

Rebate or adjusted calculation of membership fee?

 

In our daily lives, language works because there are definitions in place. Take, for instance, the underlying agreement that “cheeseburger” is the definition of something tasty that goes well with French fries and a strawberry shake. If we end that agreement so that “cheeseburger” can mean whatever you like, then the word “cheeseburger” stops meaning something specific and the definition becomes obsolete.

 

In addition, language works better the larger the group of people who’s in the agreement of a given word/definition. On the other hand, because nobody is forced to use the agreed definition, especially since neither you nor I were able to provide input when it was decided that “cheeseburger” should be called “cheeseburger”, you and I could, for instance, agree to use the word “cheeseburger” to describe a “sack of stinking manure” (no reference to your debating technique), but we are likely to run into a serious issue when we pop down to McDonald's for lunch. 

 

What I'm saying is, if it is your intention to debate the definition of the word rather than the actual meaning, feel free to sit on your own in that sandpit of yours.

 

Savvy?

[Forethat]

Somebody did a runner...