Britain, EU set Sunday deadline to clinch Brexit trade deal

[Surelynot]

2 minutes ago, transam said:

I hope you haven't got a balcony......????....................????

Arrrggghhhh.........12th floor.....there is ledge halfway down, but I don't see that saving me.

[Surelynot]

2 minutes ago, CorpusChristie said:

 

  We just wont be able to buy strawberries all  year round imported from Spain .

Only be able to buy home grown strawberries in the summer .

We will survive 

 

OMG

[Laughing Gravy]

Best and balanced article from the Times today on what will happen with a no deal. You can read the UK ones without a PPV.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/what-a-no-deal-brexit-means-for-the-uk-and-eu-p5gbrdj9t

 

Quote

 

What a no-deal Brexit means for the EU
As the EU reels from the economic impact of the pandemic the last thing it needs is an extra hit of at least €33 billion in lost annual exports.

The immediate political fallout for Brussels will be dire as relations between Britain and Europe nosedive, tempers flare in fishing grounds and lorries get stuck in ports.

Without an agreement, French, Irish, Belgian and Dutch fishing boats face being frozen out of British waters, with plenty of potential for violent clashes at sea.

 

 

Edited December 11, 2020 by onthedarkside
fair use

[Surelynot]

...and our Brexit bonus...how big is that?

Edited December 11, 2020 by onthedarkside
fair use quote removed

[Laughing Gravy]

7 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

...and our Brexit bonus...how big is that?

You can have the honour of buying British products, supporting British industries, claiming back those industries that were eroded, having some pride in your country for delivering on a democratic referendum against the EU (the first ever country to do that) and be thankful you are not one of those countries gullible enough to think they are part of anything other than a unification of Europe.

 

Other than that you can whinge on here and try and get a passport from the EU. What a great bonus.????

[petermik]

7 hours ago, Surelynot said:

...and our Brexit bonus...how big is that?

delivered down your chimneystack early dec 25....be patient..wait and see

[Surelynot]

2 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

You can have the honour of buying British products, supporting British industries, claiming back those industries that were eroded, having some pride in your country for delivering on a democratic referendum against the EU (the first ever country to do that) and be thankful you are not one of those countries gullible enough to think they are part of anything other than a unification of Europe.

 

Other than that you can whinge on here and try and get a passport from the EU. What a great bonus.????

and how big is our Brexit bonus?

[Agusts]

Times forgot to say what it means to UK... ! ????

 

If UK just wants a trade deal then get in the queue, discuss some 10 years or so to get an agreement and go over all the details...

 

Boris outright refused Canada style or whatever else style was suggested as possible options, they want all free, no condition and no limit trade, like they had before when in EU...! 

 

The poxy fishing thing is just an excuse and not lose face in front of his supporters and cronies, it's insignificant trade value/issue in total, and like British fishermen don't go in EU waters...!? 

 

 

[welovesundaysatspace]

35 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

upholding the binding principles of the single market is more important than making concessions to the UK. There is also a certain frustration at Britain’s approach to the talks: one senior centre-left MP recently said that Boris Johnson had “bidden farewell to economic rationality”.

This sums it up perfectly, not only for Germany but the whole EU: The economic benefits of protecting single market integrity simply outweigh the cost of it. Something that the UK and Brexiteers never grasped. Plus, the negotiations are going nowhere anyway when one party is looking at economic benefits and the other one is romancing about sovereignty. 
 

I hope this is done soon, deal or no deal, so we can move onto more important topics than the UK. 
 

 

Edited December 11, 2020 by welovesundaysatspace

[Laughing Gravy]

2 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

I hope this is done soon, deal or no deal, so we can move onto more important topics

I agree and I did what you did. Selectively choose part of a sentence.

[Agusts]

17 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

You never read what I said. Seems to be a trait for those who love the EU.

 

There you go again. ????

I can't open the link, asks for trial/subscription...

 

I thought you listed all the article, why didn't you put UK section if there was one, pick and choose Brexit style, ha...! Or does it look bad...!? ????

 

[Surelynot]

2 minutes ago, Agusts said:

I can't open the link, asks for trial/subscription...

 

I thought you listed all the article, why didn't you put UK section if there was one, pick and choose Brexit style, ha...! Or does it look bad...!? ????

 

Doubt it....it must spell out and quantify the Brexit bonus....555

Edited December 11, 2020 by Surelynot

[Laughing Gravy]

20 minutes ago, Agusts said:

I can't open the link, asks for trial/subscription...

 

I thought you listed all the article, why didn't you put UK section if there was one, pick and choose Brexit style, ha...! Or does it look bad...!? ????

 

I will help you out.

 

If you click the link you can  read the first part for free. That's the UK bit basically besides a few sentences. The rest you need to be a member which I pasted for you.

 

In my first sentence I mentioned a balanced view not what you are suggesting????

Edited December 11, 2020 by Laughing Gravy

[RayC]

16 minutes ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I will help you out.

 

If you click the link you can  read the first part for free. That's the UK bit basically besides a few sentences. The rest you need to be a member which I pasted for you.

 

In my first sentence I mentioned a balanced view not what you are suggesting????

(The UK bit is still hidden behind the pay wall for me).

 

Very few Remainers on TVF have claimed that 'No Deal' would not negatively affect the EU; I certainly haven't. That it will negatively affect the UK seems beyond doubt. Which leaves me puzzled is why anyone sees WTO rules as a preferred solution?

 

Here's a comprehensive report on what 'No deal' might mean for the UK. The economic effects are contained in pages 55-59. These figures confirm UK government estimates. We had best hope that their forecasts are wrong.

https://ukandeu.ac.uk/research-papers/what-would-no-deal-mean/

[Agusts]

2 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I will help you out.

 

If you click the link you can  read the first part for free. That's the UK bit basically besides a few sentences. The rest you need to be a member which I pasted for you.

 

In my first sentence I mentioned a balanced view not what you are suggesting????

 

Technical confusion I guess, we can't read the UK bit, please copy/paste it here for us...

 

[Kwasaki]

1 hour ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

I hope this is done soon, deal or no deal, so we can move onto more important topics than the UK

You were free 4 years ago and now and move on to what you regard as important topics and also free to refrain from reading any of it.

[welovesundaysatspace]

1 hour ago, Laughing Gravy said:

I agree and I did what you did. Selectively choose part of a sentence.

Sure, selectively part-quoting is perfectly fine if it improves readability while not changing the context. Common practice when writing research or thesis papers; I’ve yet to find anyone who’s unnecessarily full-quoting someone without getting his fingers slapped. 
 

It’s somehow amusing that Brexiteers (you’re not the first one) complain about this. 

[welovesundaysatspace]

1 minute ago, Kwasaki said:

You were free 4 years ago and now and move on to what you regard as important topics

Yes, and I find it regrettable that the EU didn’t do that earlier. if it was for me, I would have ended this circus long ago already. 
 

1 minute ago, Kwasaki said:

and also free to refrain from reading any of it.

Agree. I’m free to refrain from reading any of it. ???? 

[Laughing Gravy]

1 hour ago, Agusts said:

 

Technical confusion I guess, we can't read the UK bit, please copy/paste it here for us...

 

 

 

That will cost you 24  British pounds. ????

 

 

Quote

What a no-deal Brexit means for the UK
No-deal would cause significant disruption to trade. Lorries crossing the English Channel would face new border checks and potentially long queues. Restrictions on the number of lorries allowed to enter the EU would mean that about two thirds of British businesses would not be able to operate in the bloc at all, unless the EU grants a unilateral exemption. Given that 43 per cent of British exports were to the EU last year, their value totalling £294 billion, this would have a significant impact....

 

Edited December 11, 2020 by onthedarkside
fair use violation

[Laughing Gravy]

19 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Common practice when writing research or thesis papers

It certainly is not and using various citation sources such as APA you would be found to be plagerising.

 

20 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Sure, selectively part-quoting is perfectly fine if it improves readability while not changing the context.

No it does not it is misrepresenting the truth, like you did and tried to justify yourself.

 

21 minutes ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

It’s somehow amusing that Brexiteers (you’re not the first one) complain about this.

 

Not complaining just stating the obvious. Who says that the remainers have the intellect!

[GrandPapillon]

2 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

I hope this is done soon, deal or no deal, so we can move onto more important topics than the UK. 
 

 

You think it's the end of it? it will define the landscape of British politics for the next 20 years, blaming each other for the Brexit failure and even defining new party lines like the Brexit party

 

[onthedarkside]

ThaiVisa Forum has a fair use policy when it comes to quoting news and other external content -- headline, maximum 3 sentences and link to the full source.

 

Posts violating those fair use rules have been edited/shortened accordingly.

 

[david555]

My post here deleted as already on other brexit forum ....(as so there are so many i made confusion ???? )

Edited December 11, 2020 by david555

[welovesundaysatspace]

3 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

It certainly is not and using various citation sources such as APA you would be found to be plagerising.

1. Inline direct quotes are perfectly fine using APA. 
2. Plagiarism has more to do with (not) giving the right credits/source (than with full vs. partial quotes); and 

3. A full-quote could more easily be considered plagiarism than just citing the specific piece of statement or information that’s relevant or being referred to (the extreme of a full-quote would be to copy-paste the whole article/book).

 

3 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

No it does not it is misrepresenting the truth, like you did and tried to justify yourself.

Except I wasn’t. 
 

 

[Laughing Gravy]

14 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

1. Inline direct quotes are perfectly fine using APA. 

You are talking about academic writing. Where was the quotation marks, the reference. You can not compare writing on a forum or justifying it as equivalent to APA standards.

 

14 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Plagiarism has more to do with (not) giving the right credits/source (than with full vs. partial quotes); and

It is also about copying peoples work. as you did my sentence but partially.

 

14 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

A full-quote could more easily be considered plagiarism than just citing the specific piece of statement or information that’s relevant or being referred to (the extreme of a full-quote would be to copy-paste the whole article/book).

Both can be. Either way using a partial sentence is misrepresentation of the complete statement and sentence

 

14 hours ago, welovesundaysatspace said:

Except I wasn’t. 

We have your take on that. The issue is again and hardly requires scientific and academic writing to justify it. If you want to take parts of what was written expect to be challenged on it for a variety of reasons and it leads to being interpreted as bias, not factual or misleading.

 

An example.

"I really hate people writing false statements".

If you paste "I really hate people".   It has a completely different meaning and representation from the truth.

 

As you say you were not but as i do not have the abilities of reading crystal balls as many seems to have on here. How would I know!

 

Have a good day.