13 minutes ago, samran said:

“...effortlessly and seamlessly, a right we are now denying our kids and grandkids.”

 

There, I finished the sentence for you. 

I didn't realize you were female or that the EU had any bearing on the much larger umbrella I was under at the time, indeed it was possible to travel freely on a single sheet of A4 from said organisation supported by work ID.

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

But not necessarily anti Europe, indeed many have lived and worked there.

Thanks for confirming.

Just now, samran said:

...and they’ll find competent leadership following scientific advice promptly was a key factor.

 

Gawd, even Prauyth outshone Boris on this one. That’s saying heaps...(and extremely worrying).

The whole thing has been a disaster but I am far from convinced that UK is worse than anyone else for reasons already explained.

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

How does someone 'manage' a pandemic? The last 'DS solution' covered the B-B-Black ('I mentioned it once but think I got away with it' ???? ) Death several centuries ago. The nearest modern equivalent was the Tsunami but even that was little help to the likes of the current UK Govt or crisis.

How does someone manage a pandemic? You don't. But what you do is manage the response to the pandemic. And Johnson's response was pathetic. Even to the point that he ignored guidelines about personal behavior and nearly died as a result. Your response might make sense if all countries had responded similarly to the threat. But they didn't, did they? The UK government's was particularly dismal.

32 minutes ago, johnpetersen said:

How does someone manage a pandemic? You don't. But what you do is manage the response to the pandemic. And Johnson's response was pathetic. Even to the point that he ignored guidelines about personal behavior and nearly died as a result. Your response might make sense if all countries had responded similarly to the threat. But they didn't, did they? The UK government's was particularly dismal.

Quote

The whole thing has been a disaster but I am far from convinced that UK is worse than anyone else for reasons already explained.

An article just seen in todays telegraph supports the above.

Edited June 13, 20206 yr by evadgib

3 hours ago, johnpetersen said:

Then how is it you have access to the unstated motivations of those who oppose Brexit? Mind-reading?

52% leave, 48% remain is all that matters. This is how our country voted, this is why we have left the EU, what can't speak can't lie.

1 hour ago, johnpetersen said:

How does someone manage a pandemic? You don't. But what you do is manage the response to the pandemic. And Johnson's response was pathetic. Even to the point that he ignored guidelines about personal behavior and nearly died as a result. Your response might make sense if all countries had responded similarly to the threat. But they didn't, did they? The UK government's was particularly dismal.

As there are always doubts about the number of true CV deaths, the number of excess deaths provides a useful approximation. 64,200 (+57%) in the UK, 24,700 (+27%) in France, 8500 (+6%) in Germany.

https://www.ft.com/content/a26fbf7e-48f8-11ea-aeb3-955839e06441

(Free to view article)

 

It's not difficult to find out why it has been so low in Germany: they anticipated it and prepared for it. When the outburst occured, they already had a stock of equipment and supplies, including tests. They also had an organisation and procedures ready. The French did not anticipate much, hence the high death toll, but they reacted faster than the British.

Edited June 13, 20206 yr by candide

6 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Sure, blame the EU. It would be funny if it wouldn't be so sad.

It's always been the EU's fault. Whatever made you think it wasn't? Sad but true.

Here is one argument I don't particularly understand on this whole debate. I hope someone can explain it to me.

 

Fisheries is apparently turning into this huge obstacle. I was reading in that bastion of fair and unbiased journalism this morning, The Express,  about some Brexit "expert" claimining the UK fishing industry will be decimated under a no deal/WTO arrangement. But the argument he gave was incredibly confusing. According to him, since the EU primarily buys salmon and "lan·gous·tines" (had to look that one up), and that there is little domestic demand for those fish, that unless the UK had access to that EU market, the British fishing industry would be "decimated".

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1294555/Brexit-news-latest-UK-eu-free-trade-deal-Boris-johnson-fisheries-michel-barnier

 

But how could that be? If the UK currently only currently catches about 10% of fish available in their territorial waters, then it seems there will be a tremendous market opportunity after eliminating the EU. I personally would love to be able to buy cheaper salmon and lobsters here in Thailand, and the US market is very big.  It will take time to establish new distribution chains, but the UK is going to need time to rebuild their fishing fleets anyway. The only losers, it seems, would be the EU. Thier fishing industry would be decimated. The British fleets would only see wild blue ocean.

 

Can someone explain to me the argument then, that the UK has "no real leverage"? It seems to me the UK is holding all the cards, and it is the EU who has no leverage. And while building those new routes, the fish will replenish making their price even cheaper. Seems to be a win-win for everyone in the world except the EU.

 

Where have I misunderstood?

 

6 hours ago, Monomial said:

Here is one argument I don't particularly understand on this whole debate. I hope someone can explain it to me.

 

Fisheries is apparently turning into this huge obstacle. I was reading in that bastion of fair and unbiased journalism this morning, The Express,  about some Brexit "expert" claimining the UK fishing industry will be decimated under a no deal/WTO arrangement. But the argument he gave was incredibly confusing. According to him, since the EU primarily buys salmon and "lan·gous·tines" (had to look that one up), and that there is little domestic demand for those fish, that unless the UK had access to that EU market, the British fishing industry would be "decimated".

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1294555/Brexit-news-latest-UK-eu-free-trade-deal-Boris-johnson-fisheries-michel-barnier

 

But how could that be? If the UK currently only currently catches about 10% of fish available in their territorial waters, then it seems there will be a tremendous market opportunity after eliminating the EU. I personally would love to be able to buy cheaper salmon and lobsters here in Thailand, and the US market is very big.  It will take time to establish new distribution chains, but the UK is going to need time to rebuild their fishing fleets anyway. The only losers, it seems, would be the EU. Thier fishing industry would be decimated. The British fleets would only see wild blue ocean.

 

Can someone explain to me the argument then, that the UK has "no real leverage"? It seems to me the UK is holding all the cards, and it is the EU who has no leverage. And while building those new routes, the fish will replenish making their price even cheaper. Seems to be a win-win for everyone in the world except the EU.

 

Where have I misunderstood?

 

" Where have I misunderstood "

 

All i guess....as it is not allone about fish.....Playing level field in trade ....never heared about that?...and so much other !

 

But never mind ..dont bother anymore about ....WTO rules shall clear it up for you to understand the different way of trading....against common market trading.

Edited June 13, 20206 yr by david555

6 hours ago, Monomial said:

Here is one argument I don't particularly understand on this whole debate. I hope someone can explain it to me.

 

Fisheries is apparently turning into this huge obstacle. I was reading in that bastion of fair and unbiased journalism this morning, The Express,  about some Brexit "expert" claimining the UK fishing industry will be decimated under a no deal/WTO arrangement. But the argument he gave was incredibly confusing. According to him, since the EU primarily buys salmon and "lan·gous·tines" (had to look that one up), and that there is little domestic demand for those fish, that unless the UK had access to that EU market, the British fishing industry would be "decimated".

 

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1294555/Brexit-news-latest-UK-eu-free-trade-deal-Boris-johnson-fisheries-michel-barnier

 

But how could that be? If the UK currently only currently catches about 10% of fish available in their territorial waters, then it seems there will be a tremendous market opportunity after eliminating the EU. I personally would love to be able to buy cheaper salmon and lobsters here in Thailand, and the US market is very big.  It will take time to establish new distribution chains, but the UK is going to need time to rebuild their fishing fleets anyway. The only losers, it seems, would be the EU. Thier fishing industry would be decimated. The British fleets would only see wild blue ocean.

 

Can someone explain to me the argument then, that the UK has "no real leverage"? It seems to me the UK is holding all the cards, and it is the EU who has no leverage. And while building those new routes, the fish will replenish making their price even cheaper. Seems to be a win-win for everyone in the world except the EU.

 

Where have I misunderstood?

 

It means that Fish on Fridays will be extended  to several more  days a week than was originally designated by the Pope.

 

6 hours ago, Monomial said:

I personally would love to be able to buy cheaper salmon and lobsters here in Thailand, and the US market is very big

 

In Thailand the UK will have to compete with Thai fishermen. Good luck with that, competing with Thai salaries. Do you know a lot of fishermen on Thai ships do not even get money but almost work like slaves? Are UK fishermen willing to work like that? The distance between the UK and Thailand is also big. Too big to deliver fresh fish. The only thing they can sell here is cheap frozen fish. I don't believe that there will be any profit for the UK.

 

And do you think the US is interested in fish from the UK?  They have enough sea, fishermen etc. And again, the supply line is very long, making it more expensive. And you will not be able to deliver fresh fish to the US. It will be frozen, which has a big impact on price. 

 

Fishing in Europe is not very profitable. High investments, high salaries, expensive fuel for ships. Selling fresh fish in Europe is still profitable. But you can forget about competing in the world market with frozen fish. Losing the European market will be the end for the UK fishing industry.

 

And there's me thinking the the majority of the British media are pro EU. While the majority of the electorate.as shown in repeated elections  are anti E.U.

On 6/12/2020 at 7:06 AM, Bruntoid said:

People who voted for brexit are well past working age - it’s the youth they’ve shafted - cheers grandad! 

Living in the UK, I find your statement ridicules. Many,many of the younger generation,democratically voted for the U.K to leave the E.U. Unfortunately as we see on this thread, a few diehards brainwashed fools,refuse to accept the will of the people.

1 hour ago, Tiger1980 said:

Living in the UK, I find your statement ridicules. Many,many of the younger generation,democratically voted for the U.K to leave the E.U. Unfortunately as we see on this thread, a few diehards brainwashed fools,refuse to accept the will of the people.

The will of only 37% of the electorate. And many of them may change their minds if a no deal Brexit really happens.

8 hours ago, david555 said:

" Where have I misunderstood "

 

All i guess....as it is not allone about fish.....Playing level field in trade ....never heared about that?...and so much other !

 

But never mind ..dont bother anymore about ....WTO rules shall clear it up for you to understand the different way of trading....against common market trading.

What you've misunderstood is the value of fresh wild seafood  vs. frozen. There's a huge premium paid for freshly caught wild seafood. It's true that it is possible to fly it further abroad, but the transport costs add a lot to the price. So a lot less competitive.

8 hours ago, david555 said:

" Where have I misunderstood "

 

All i guess....as it is not allone about fish.....Playing level field in trade ....never heared about that?...and so much other !

 

But never mind ..dont bother anymore about ....WTO rules shall clear it up for you to understand the different way of trading....against common market trading.

It would seem to me that it is Barnier that is in a frenzy about not getting his hands on our haddock or not being able to pillage our pilchards, oh how his attutude has changed and I don't hear many snide remarks coming out of the EU now.

1 hour ago, vogie said:

It would seem to me that it is Barnier that is in a frenzy about not getting his hands on our haddock or not being able to pillage our pilchards, oh how his attutude has changed and I don't hear many snide remarks coming out of the EU now.

The " fish " has become a symbol dossier ....just an admission of the U.K. that they agree to be in good terms to work really together or not ...( in my opinion..)

Barnier attitude changed  as he is finnally loosing his patience , i must admire him to keep it so long with  "the stiff upper lip people " ????

 

Mean time the kicking the can up the road further goes on as U.K. has no plans made ,no preparations done , as they are in unbelief they can not win what they want ...not used to that ????????....

Well start believing the defeat as it is named WTO rules 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 14, 20206 yr by david555

7 hours ago, Tiger1980 said:

Living in the UK, I find your statement ridicules. Many,many of the younger generation,democratically voted for the U.K to leave the E.U. Unfortunately as we see on this thread, a few diehards brainwashed fools,refuse to accept the will of the people.

Of course many youngsters voted brexit. But the vast majority of the youth voted remain, as the stats show. "Nearly three quarters (73%) of 18 to 24 year-olds voted to remain" from https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2019/03/a-reminder-of-how-britain-voted-in-the-eu-referendum-and-why/

15 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Of course many youngsters voted brexit. But the vast majority of the youth voted remain, as the stats show. "Nearly three quarters (73%) of 18 to 24 year-olds voted to remain" from https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2019/03/a-reminder-of-how-britain-voted-in-the-eu-referendum-and-why/

And?  Results aren't decided by age groups ! Ref in 2016 and subsequent Other elections have upheld the decision! If other EU countries have their citizens a similar vote there would be a similar result! The Brussel bureaucrats are s**t scared of an independent states leaving it's Mafia stranglehold!

37 minutes ago, pixelaoffy said:

If other EU countries have their citizens a similar vote there would be a similar result! The Brussel bureaucrats are s**t scared of an independent states leaving it's Mafia stranglehold!

Wrong.

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/03/19/europeans-credit-eu-with-promoting-peace-and-prosperity-but-say-brussels-is-out-of-touch-with-its-citizens/

6 hours ago, pixelaoffy said:

And?  Results aren't decided by age groups ! Ref in 2016 and subsequent Other elections have upheld the decision! If other EU countries have their citizens a similar vote there would be a similar result! The Brussel bureaucrats are s**t scared of an independent states leaving it's Mafia stranglehold!

Why 'and'? Someone makes a post saying many youngsters voted brexit, I pointed out that many did, but far more not. So the last part of your post has nothing to do with my answer, just a reason for you to get your anti EU stance in. Noted.

7 hours ago, stevenl said:

Of course many youngsters voted brexit. But the vast majority of the youth voted remain, as the stats show. "Nearly three quarters (73%) of 18 to 24 year-olds voted to remain" //

There will be more-and-more young people mostly wanting back privileged they had with EU, and less-and-less older retirees mostly wanting leaving EU... So I wonder how many years before another referendum will be demanded by a majority 

48 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

There will be more-and-more young people mostly wanting back privileged they had with EU, and less-and-less older retirees mostly wanting leaving EU... So I wonder how many years before another referendum will be demanded by a majority 

That doesn't help anymore. UK has officially left the EU and the way UK is now, it will take some time, before EU member countries wishes UK back. All of them have to agree for doing so.

 

In the near future. UK will split. Scotland will be given a fasttrack to join the EU. 

 

England++ will have to figure out what it wishes to be in the future. If the model of England++ is still suitable to be part of the EU, then it can be allowed to join the EU, if it wishes. 

 

Likelyhood for this to happen in the next 10 years is pretty much nill. After 20 years, perhaps, but it really depends where England++ is going towards. 

 

The game is over.

16 hours ago, Tiger1980 said:

Living in the UK, I find your statement ridicules. Many,many of the younger generation,democratically voted for the U.K to leave the E.U. Unfortunately as we see on this thread, a few diehards brainwashed fools,refuse to accept the will of the people.

Your Statement is wrong.

And I'm sure that you're not so stupid that you can't read the election result numbers by age group. It is only disturbing if the Pro Brexit idiology cannot accept these facts.

 

In the 18-24 age group, 73% voted for remain.

In the age group 25-34, 62% voted for remain.

In the age group 35-44, 52% voted for remain.

 

The statement that the majority of young Britons between the ages of 18 and 44 would rather have stayed in the EU is correct.

 

The majority of the younger Brits see greater future prospects as a member within the EU as outside. This is the generation that will later have to work out pensions for the elderly. What irony.

37 minutes ago, TheDark said:

That doesn't help anymore. UK has officially left the EU and the way UK is now, it will take some time, before EU member countries wishes UK back. All of them have to agree for doing so.

 

In the near future. UK will split. Scotland will be given a fasttrack to join the EU. 

 

England++ will have to figure out what it wishes to be in the future. If the model of England++ is still suitable to be part of the EU, then it can be allowed to join the EU, if it wishes. 

 

Likelyhood for this to happen in the next 10 years is pretty much nill. After 20 years, perhaps, but it really depends where England++ is going towards. 

 

The game is over.

It is exactly like that. Now it is important to create bilateral win-win situations on a small scale, without another external contracting country being made worse.

And the EU has trade agreements with 70 non-EU countries

There can be no special treatment for the UK. The UK must now live alone with its sovereignty.

 

Many Brexiteers simply do not understand the initial situation in the negotiations.

 

Here is the list of countries that the EU must also take into account.

https://trade.ec.europa.eu/tradehelp/free-trade-agreements

Edited June 14, 20206 yr by tomacht8

38 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

It is exactly like that. Now it is important to create bilateral win-win situations on a small scale, without another external contracting country being made worse.

And the EU has trade agreements with 70 non-EU countries

There can be no special treatment for the UK. The UK must now live alone with its sovereignty.

 

Many Brexiteers simply do not understand the initial situation in the negotiations.

 

Here is the list of countries that the EU must also take into account.

https://trade.ec.europa.eu/tradehelp/free-trade-agreements

Thank you for your concern, but we will be fine thank you.

 

https://paultan.org/2020/03/09/nissan-commits-to-uk-despite-brexit-to-invest-rm2-2-bil-for-production-of-next-gen-qashqai-at-sunderland/

4 minutes ago, bartender100 said:

Thank you for your concern, but we will be fine thank you.

 

https://paultan.org/2020/03/09/nissan-commits-to-uk-despite-brexit-to-invest-rm2-2-bil-for-production-of-next-gen-qashqai-at-sunderland/

You're a bit out of date with that link:

 

Nissan warns Sunderland plant can't survive no-deal Brexit

Nissan has repeated its warning that the company’s giant Sunderland plant will not be sustainable if the UK and European Union fail to agree a free-trade Brexit deal.  

The carmaker's global chief operating officer Ashwani Gupta hinted that Nissan could be forced to axe the factory if the UK does not secure tariff-free access to EU markets, a move that would lead to thousands of job losses.

It comes less than a week after the future of the Sunderland plant looked secure for years to come following the Japanese company's decision to shut its Spanish factory - leaving the North East site as Nissan's only major facility in Europe.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2020/06/03/nissan-warns-sunderland-plant-cant-survive-no-deal-brexit/

11 minutes ago, bartender100 said:

Thank you for your concern, but we will be fine thank you.

 

https://paultan.org/2020/03/09/nissan-commits-to-uk-despite-brexit-to-invest-rm2-2-bil-for-production-of-next-gen-qashqai-at-sunderland/

Well, does that go on for a sustainable UK car industry? Optimism is good, but the EU and Japan have signed a free trade agreement. Will the UK still be competitive for large-scale car production when the barrier-free market shrinks from over 450 million to 60 million customers? I have my doubts. Transport costs to the EU from a highly efficient plant in Japan will be less than the possible tariff from UK exports to the EU. 

 

The big, global companies only look at their profit without emotion. There will be no hurray Brexit credit bonus.

I think Boris can better  tune down his optimistic expectations for a deal in July as Germany has dealt the order ….

Daniel Boffey in Brussels and Lisa O'Carroll

Wed 17 Jun 2020 13.30 BST

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/17/brexit-germany-urges-eu-to-plan-for-possible-no-deal-20

Brexit: Germany urges EU to plan for possible 'no deal 2.0' 
Leaked document suggests Berlin has earmarked September as key month in talks

 

 

Germany is urging the EU to draw up contingency plans for Brexit “no deal 2.0”, warning in an internal document that member states should not accede to British plans for a swift summer trade and security deal “at any price”.

Despite the most recent mood music around the negotiations being positive, there remain major sticking points to resolve and time is short after Boris Johnson confirmed that the transition period would not be extended.

The prime minister has said he believes a deal can be secured over the summer, but according to a leaked document obtained by Reuters the German government has earmarked September as the key month.
more...