Just now, Bluespunk said:

So I was correct on both points.

 

Good to see that acknowledged. 

Well, if someone says "The sky is blue", and you retort with "Ah, but grass is green" then yes, I suppose you can claim to be correct on some kind of level.

 

However, you have also demonstrated that you are unable to disprove the original statement. So thanks for that ????. 

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

Well, if someone says "The sky is blue", and you retort with "Ah, but grass is green" then yes, I suppose you can claim to be correct on some kind of level.

 

However, you have also demonstrated that you are unable to disprove the original statement. So thanks for that ????. 

As I was correct, then no need to further counter and make clear the deliberate misrepresentation of your claims.

Just now, Bluespunk said:

As I was correct, then no need to further counter and make clear the deliberate misrepresentation of your claims.

If you believe that saying that something is politically problematic is the same as claming that it is unlawful then I am afraid that is your comprehension issue, not an issue of my misrepresentation.  

 

Thanks for demonstrating that so succinctly.

38 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

IMO 2 years is too early to conclude on the economic side of things. You can't unravel decades of EU rules, regulations and incompetence in 2.5 years. Neither can you sign all potential trade deals in that timeframe

Agreed but there is little short-term evidence to suggest that there are/ will be any benefits to Brexit, in fact, the opposite  https://www.ft.com/content/c6ee4ce2-95b3-4d92-858f-c50566529b5e 

 

Likewise there is little, if any, evidence to suggest that the current UK government is any less incompetent than the EU authorities.

 

38 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

 but I believe long term (10-20 years) it will prove beneficial.

Any evidence/ sources that provide projections to support this wishful thinking?

 

38 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

In terms of escaping the EU federalist project and regaining our sovereignty and democracy, it was absolutely worth it. I prefer the decisions affecting our country are made by politicians that we elect, not some unelected technocrat in Brussels. You can't really put an economic price on that.

That there are federalists in Brussels and the EU is undeniable, but unless the individual member states vote for a federal Europe (which they won't) then it will not happen.

 

Unelected technocrats in Brussels - I assume that you mean the Commission? - do not pass laws. EU legislation is passed by the European Council - which is comprised of the 27 member states' heads of government - and the European parliament, whose members are directly elected by the voters in EU member states.

 

In a similar way to the unelected mandarins in Whitehall, the unelected technocrats in Brussels take their policy direction from their political masters (the UK government and the European Council respectively).

 

One added value for member states is that they can direct the Commission to work on policy areas where they may lack the necessary time, resources or expertise to do so themselves.

 

Between 1999 and 2016, the UK was forced to enact +/-2% of EU legislation with which it disagreed.

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-facts-behind-claims-uk-influence/

 

I don't believe that all the economic, political and social chaos caused by Brexit is worth it in order to reclaim 2% of sovereignty but clearly others disagree.

How did faith in Boris Johnson’s premiership crumble in less than three years?

Because people who thought they were electing a Conservative government have discovered that it's led by a green socialist.

1 hour ago, RayC said:

 

 

58 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

That is going way off topic and it will all get deleted .

So, no point in discussing it 

I was simply disagreeing with your assertion that the effects of Brexit could not be predicted.

 

Moreover, as @Kinnock infers any discussion of Johnson's future must surely take into account his past record as PM (bolding unintentional).

8 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

I was simply disagreeing with your assertion that the effects of Brexit could not be predicted.

 

Moreover, as @Kinnock infers any discussion of Johnson's future must surely take into account his past record as PM (bolding unintentional).

In regards to your "ready made meal" post .

That was a prediction of how the talks would proceed in the future , that was how he thought that the negotiations would proceed , no one expected the E.U to be so stern or for Remainers to be so stern as well 

18 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

In regards to your "ready made meal" post .

That was a prediction of how the talks would proceed in the future , that was how he thought that the negotiations would proceed , no one expected the E.U to be so stern or for Remainers to be so stern as well 

It might be argued that the EU could be more flexible in the implementation of some border controls e.g. have a list of 'trusted traders' where there were minimal controls. However, the fact that the UK government has regnated on commitments and threatened to break international law means that trust in short supply. Given that, the EU chooses to implement the letter of the law. Who can blame them?

 

The UK government left the EU. The EU did not leave the UK. It's about time that the UK government (and Brexiters in general) took some responsibility and accountability for this decision, rather than pointing the finger at others.

1 hour ago, JonnyF said:

If you believe that saying that something is politically problematic is the same as claming that it is unlawful then I am afraid that is your comprehension issue, not an issue of my misrepresentation.  

 

Thanks for demonstrating that so succinctly.

No, still your misrepresentation.

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

No, still your misrepresentation.

I can explain it to you. But I cannot understand it for you. It's a fairly basic concept we are talking about here.

 

Maybe try addressing the points I made. Rather than pretending I said something  else and refuting that. 

19 hours ago, onthedarkside said:

How did Boris Johnson go from hero to zero in less than three years as prime minister?

He didn’t. He’s still PM, which is hardly a zero, except in the Lefty press distorted way of counting. 
 

He’s more of a +211, a winner again. 

2 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

In regards to your "ready made meal" post .

That was a prediction of how the talks would proceed in the future , that was how he thought that the negotiations would proceed , no one expected the E.U to be so stern or for Remainers to be so stern as well 

Really? No one expected the EU to be so stern? If by "no one" you mean "Brexiters" you may have a point. But the EU was very clear about what would happen after Brexit. Basically it was either you're in or you're out.. It was the Brexiters who kept on claiming that the EU would capitulate. I remember Brexiters repeatedly claiming that the UK had the upper hand because of the size of its economy. Even though its economy was about 1/6 the size of the rest of the EU.

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Really? No one expected the EU to be so stern? If by "no one" you mean "Brexiters" you may have a point. But the EU was very clear about what would happen after Brexit. Basically it was either you're in or you're out.. It was the Brexiters who kept on claiming that the EU would capitulate. I remember Brexiters repeatedly claiming that the UK had the upper hand because of the size of its economy. Even though its economy was about 1/6 the size of the rest of the EU.

It was the E.U and the U.K Remainers who deliberately  wouldn't come to any agreement , in the hope that  there would be an new U.K election in which Labour would win and then the U.K would remain in the E.U .

   The E.U and the Remainers refused to come to any agreement in the hope that the whole thing would be postponed

50 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

I can explain it to you. But I cannot understand it for you. It's a fairly basic concept we are talking about here.

 

Maybe try addressing the points I made. Rather than pretending I said something  else and refuting that. 

I did address the points you made.

 

The uk vaccine roll out had nothing to do with brexit.

 

Many of the major European nations have a better vaccine rate per head of population than the uk. 

18 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

It was the E.U and the U.K Remainers who deliberately  wouldn't come to any agreement , in the hope that  there would be an new U.K election in which Labour would win and then the U.K would remain in the E.U .

   The E.U and the Remainers refused to come to any agreement in the hope that the whole thing would be postponed

Doing  a mindreading act? And I wasn't aware that the Remainers were at the negotiating table. As the EU explained over and over again, the benefits of being in the EU outweigh the costs. Clearly the Brexiters didn't and don't believe it. They expected some privileges and no costs.  So why are they griping? By their reckoning, they're already ahead.  

18 hours ago, Hummin said:

Hard to understand for one looking from outside how he managed to get in power in the first place! 

 

Unbelievable

Very easy to understand, the choice was Boris or Teresa ............. so no choice at all really.

Same as the USA whose choice was Trump or Hillary ....... another no choice decision.

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Doing  a mindreading act? And I wasn't aware that the Remainers were at the negotiating table. As the EU explained over and over again, the benefits of being in the EU outweigh the costs. Clearly the Brexiters didn't and don't believe it. They expected some privileges and no costs.  So why are they griping? By their reckoning, they're already ahead.  

They got their hard Brexit and STILL they are angry....

'You won, get over it.'

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Doing  a mindreading act? And I wasn't aware that the Remainers were at the negotiating table. As the EU explained over and over again, the benefits of being in the EU outweigh the costs. Clearly the Brexiters didn't and don't believe it. They expected some privileges and no costs.  So why are they griping? By their reckoning, they're already ahead.  

The Remainer M.Ps were required to agree to the exit terms before Brexit could happen and they refused to agree to anything , just said no to all propositions and therefore the exit was delayed for four years  .

  Not all Brexitters wanted the same thing , so you cannot say "they wanted" something, because they all had different opinions to what they wanted

2 minutes ago, baboon said:

They got their hard Brexit and STILL they are angry....

'You won, get over it.'

Who is "angry" ?

8 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Very easy to understand, the choice was Boris or Teresa ............. so no choice at all really.

Same as the USA whose choice was Trump or Hillary ....... another no choice decision.

True, 

26 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

The Remainer M.Ps were required to agree to the exit terms before Brexit could happen and they refused to agree to anything , just said no to all propositions and therefore the exit was delayed for four years  .

  Not all Brexitters wanted the same thing , so you cannot say "they wanted" something, because they all had different opinions to what they wanted

 Really? It was perfectly possible for there not to be an agreement. In fact, I don't see how the UK's inability to ratify an agreement would have stopped the split. The UK's internal laws would have no bearing on what the EU chose to do.  In fact, as the deadline for concluding the talks approached, there was much speculation about reverting to WTO rules if no agreement was reached.

You do have a point about what Brexiters wanted, though. Many actually believed that the UK would be able to trade with the EU on a tariff -free basis. They had all sorts of beliefs encouraged by the Tory leadership but not grounded in reality. 

And if you want to consider a truly ludicrous absolute generalization about what people believed Brexit would entail, how about this one . : no one expected the E.U to be so stern   

It's pretty clear that most Remainers did. Namely, ya gotta pay to play.

 

3 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

In regards to your "ready made meal" post .

That was a prediction of how the talks would proceed in the future , that was how he thought that the negotiations would proceed , no one expected the E.U to be so stern or for Remainers to be so stern as well 

Come on. UK had been part of the EU for decades. Boris and his staff perfectly knew the essence of treaties, regulations and state of mind of the EU and its member States. On top of it, the EU position had been clearly expressed from the start.

5 hours ago, JonnyF said:

It will blow over.

 

A week is a long time in politics.

 

He's safe for another 12 months. 

If the Tories lose the two upcoming by elections badly, brand Boris will be shown to be toxic with the Tory heartland. 

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

 Really? It was perfectly possible for there not to be an agreement. In fact, I don't see how the UK's inability to ratify an agreement would have stopped the split. The UK's internal laws would have no bearing on what the EU chose to do.  In fact, as the deadline for concluding the talks approached, there was much speculation about reverting to WTO rules if no agreement was reached.

You do have a point about what Brexiters wanted, though. Many actually believed that the UK would be able to trade with the EU on a tariff -free basis. They had all sorts of beliefs encouraged by the Tory leadership but not grounded in reality. 

And if you want to consider a truly ludicrous absolute generalization about what people believed Brexit would entail, how about this one . : no one expected the E.U to be so stern   no one expected the E.U to be so stern

It's pretty clear that most Remainers did. Namely, ya gotta pay to play.

 

Nah, the German car industry were going to come to our aid and the EU would fold, remember that one? 

Or 'Well we aren't going to compromise so the EU will just have to'. 

What a bloody mess.

The Tories want to revive Imperial measures yet their slogan is ' Go Global'.

How many countries in the world use Imperial measures as opposed to metric?

It's so utterly stupid.

10 minutes ago, bannork said:

The Tories want to revive Imperial measures yet their slogan is ' Go Global'.

How many countries in the world use Imperial measures as opposed to metric?

It's so utterly stupid.

Not least because we had already gone metric years before joining the Common Market, so it isn't even a 'Brexit Bonus'. But it is likely this 'policy' is probably just another dead cat.

4 minutes ago, bannork said:

The Tories want to revive Imperial measures yet their slogan is ' Go Global'.

How many countries in the world use Imperial measures as opposed to metric?

It's so utterly stupid.

Nonsense again .

The Tories want to get rid of E.U laws that require metric measurement to be prominently displayed .  

  Leaving it up to the individual whether they want to use metric or imperial measurements .

   People can use either one , but its very unlikely many people would want to use Imperial measurements , because no one under 50 years old knows what they are 

1 hour ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

It was the E.U and the U.K Remainers who deliberately  wouldn't come to any agreement , in the hope that  there would be an new U.K election in which Labour would win and then the U.K would remain in the E.U .

   The E.U and the Remainers refused to come to any agreement in the hope that the whole thing would be postponed

This is exactly what I meant about a lack of accountability and responsibility on the part of Brexiters. It's always someone else's fault.

 

No doubt that the absence of any trade deal with the US will be the fault of the Irish influence in the US senate.

22 minutes ago, baboon said:

Nah, the German car industry were going to come to our aid and the EU would fold, remember that one? 

Or 'Well we aren't going to compromise so the EU will just have to'. 

What a bloody mess.

I've got an even better one. Remember Brexiters' indignation on behalf of the British fishing industry? Where did all that concern go when, in the wake of Brexit, the fishing industry collapsed? 

7 minutes ago, RayC said:

This is exactly what I meant about a lack of accountability and responsibility on the part of Brexiters. It's always someone else's fault.

 

No doubt that the absence of any trade deal with the US will be the fault of the Irish influence in the US senate.

Well OK .

The Remain M.P.s refused to vote for anything that would make Brexit happen.

They voted no to all propositions and so the U,.K couldn't leave the E.U because they voted No on everything .

  So, the reason why the U.K couldn't leave the E.U was because of the Remainer UK politicians .

  So , whose fault was it that the UK couldnt leave the E.U ?