May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[AlexRich]

On 03/05/2017 at 10:38 AM, dick dasterdly said:

Of course not - at that point nobody 'important' thought that the referendum result would be brexit!

 

Hence the lack of any plan by the UK government in the event that the vote went against their recommendations.

 

 

I think you've missed the point? Being that the electorate should have been informed, by either side, that there would be money to pay in order to exit the EU. Of course, this would have been labelled "project fear" by the charlatans that gave us £350 million per week extra to spend and who assured us that "they need us more than we need them" ... and other such nonsense. 

 

You would have thought that the Remain camp would at least have mentioned that there was a bill to pay? That would have counteracted the £359 m lie ... did no one know this?

[AlexRich]

Amusing to see the GDP debate ... by the same character that seemed to believe that German car trade meant surefire access to the single market ... but the fact of the matter is that the EU economy has improved and appears to be on a positive growth trajectory ... maybe why those predictions of imminent implosion don't seem to appear on here anymore? Looks like the UK is entering the slow lane ... and we don't actually leave until 2019. Way to go Brexiteers.

[sandyf]

One day the UK politicians will wake up to what they have done. The US monitor all dollar transactions so it is a foregone conclusion the EU will now take steps to follow suit.

 

"A previous attempt to force big clearing houses to relocate to the continent was thrown out for being contrary to the rules of the single market – which Britain now plans to leave."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-eu-city-of-london-clearing-trade-hammond-warning-a7718226.html

 

People should remember that those at the helm of the SS Brexit are in possession of the most reliable of lifejackets, personal wealth, it is those on the lower decks that will be fighting for survival.

 

[shanesox]

Amusing to see the GDP debate ... by the same character that seemed to believe that German car trade meant surefire access to the single market ... but the fact of the matter is that the EU economy has improved and appears to be on a positive growth trajectory ... maybe why those predictions of imminent implosion don't seem to appear on here anymore? Looks like the UK is entering the slow lane ... and we don't actually leave until 2019. Way to go Brexiteers.

The UK economy is doing far better than EU's which is in "slow lane" Fact is the EU membership has proved a drag on UK economy. All indicators are the British economy will thrive outside that "outdated centralised bureaucratic 20th century club" so "way to go" in the wide world


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[SheungWan]

2 hours ago, shanesox said:

The UK economy is doing far better than EU's which is in "slow lane" Fact is the EU membership has proved a drag on UK economy. All indicators are the British economy will thrive outside that "outdated centralised bureaucratic 20th century club" so "way to go" in the wide world


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

'Fact is.....', 'All indicators.....':

[Grouse]

Local elections showing big gains for the Con Party, big losses for labour particularly in England (Corbyn is not leader of Welsh Lab Party). Lib Dems varied - must try harder.

 

Surely Corbyn MUST stand down and enable a real opposition following next months general election 

 

"IN THE NAME OF GOD, GO!"

Edited May 5, 2017 by Grouse

[dick dasterdly]

4 hours ago, AlexRich said:

I think you've missed the point? Being that the electorate should have been informed, by either side, that there would be money to pay in order to exit the EU. Of course, this would have been labelled "project fear" by the charlatans that gave us £350 million per week extra to spend and who assured us that "they need us more than we need them" ... and other such nonsense. 

 

You would have thought that the Remain camp would at least have mentioned that there was a bill to pay? That would have counteracted the £359 m lie ... did no one know this?

Not necessarily as it would be obvious that the UK would have to pay its 'dues' until the actual leave date two years later.

 

The argument is now about whether the UK must pay for ongoing costs of projects started whilst the UK was still a 'full' member (i.e. before article 50 was enacted) and pension commitments for all EU politicians/admin staff etc.?

[dick dasterdly]

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

One day the UK politicians will wake up to what they have done. The US monitor all dollar transactions so it is a foregone conclusion the EU will now take steps to follow suit.

 

"A previous attempt to force big clearing houses to relocate to the continent was thrown out for being contrary to the rules of the single market – which Britain now plans to leave."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-eu-city-of-london-clearing-trade-hammond-warning-a7718226.html

 

People should remember that those at the helm of the SS Brexit are in possession of the most reliable of lifejackets, personal wealth, it is those on the lower decks that will be fighting for survival.

 

Re. the last paragraph - that's always the case....

[rockingrobin]

38 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Not necessarily as it would be obvious that the UK would have to pay its 'dues' until the actual leave date two years later.

 

The argument is now about whether the UK must pay for ongoing costs of projects started whilst the UK was still a 'full' member (i.e. before article 50 was enacted) and pension commitments for all EU politicians/admin staff etc.?

The question is , does Art50 contract the parties out of customary international law. I would expect if the UK and EU cannot agree,  they will go to arbitration.

[dick dasterdly]

58 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Not necessarily as it would be obvious that the UK would have to pay its 'dues' until the actual leave date two years later.

 

The argument is now about whether the UK must pay for ongoing costs of projects started whilst the UK was still a 'full' member (i.e. before article 50 was enacted) and pension commitments for all EU politicians/admin staff etc.?

 

16 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

The question is , does Art50 contract the parties out of customary international law. I would expect if the UK and EU cannot agree,  they will go to arbitration.

I gather the EU is stating that disputes will be dealt with in the ECJ?

 

Of course they could also refer to the ICJ - based in Holland....

 

Or then again, if it proves impossible for the UK to reach any agreement with the EU, the obvious solution would be 'no agreement' - we'll pay you the 'member' fee to date and nothing else.

 

End result?  Both the UK and EU are left in a very bad position.

[vogie]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

Local elections showing big gains for the Con Party, big losses for labour particularly in England (Corbyn is not leader of Welsh Lab Party). Lib Dems varied - must try harder.

 

Surely Corbyn MUST stand down and enable a real opposition following next months general election 

 

"IN THE NAME OF GOD, GO!"

But who will pick their next leader, the left wing unions and the looney left wing voters, so you will end up with another Corbyn clone. Labour is finished in its present form, either revise the way the leader is elected or another party needs to be established with the decent MPs Labour still has. What we we call that party, god only knows. I would have thought that Hilary Benn would have made a good leader, but I'm sure his father Tony would disagree.

[Flustered]

I was very happy to see Labour "elect" Corbyn. It has returned Labour to it's grass roots and not Blairs carbon copy of the Tories.

 

Now we have a true Socialist Party and a Tory party. There is however middle ground that could be occupied by a centralist party but as the Lib Dems are just a flaky joke, the greens (Who?) and UKIP a finished force, Just as in the "Four" who left Labour to found the Social Democrats, a new party is needed.

[vogie]

1 minute ago, Flustered said:

I was very happy to see Labour "elect" Corbyn. It has returned Labour to it's grass roots and not Blairs carbon copy of the Tories.

 

Now we have a true Socialist Party and a Tory party. There is however middle ground that could be occupied by a centralist party but as the Lib Dems are just a flaky joke, the greens (Who?) and UKIP a finished force, Just as in the "Four" who left Labour to found the Social Democrats, a new party is needed.

That is very true, but a party is useless if its not electable.

[Flustered]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

"IN THE NAME OF GOD, GO!"

Why? He is a true Socialist. elected under the Labour Party rules.

 

Labour is now the Socialist Party it should have been under Blair.

 

It's called democracy.

[Flustered]

1 minute ago, vogie said:

That is very true, but a party is useless if its not electable.

We agree on a lot, but if a party is not electable, then it means their policies are not accepted by the majority. They should then try to explain clearer what it is they stand for or give it up as a lost cause.

 

Blair ruined the Labour party with his swing to the Tory policies and as it was admitted, in the end you could not fit a cigarette paper between them. It was only our dear Gordon who blew Labour out of the water.

 

The country should have a choice between Left, central and Right politics which up until Gordon's destruction of Labour we did not have. All we need now is a centralist party.

[dick dasterdly]

16 minutes ago, vogie said:

But who will pick their next leader, the left wing unions and the looney left wing voters, so you will end up with another Corbyn clone. Labour is finished in its present form, either revise the way the leader is elected or another party needs to be established with the decent MPs Labour still has. What we we call that party, god only knows. I would have thought that Hilary Benn would have made a good leader, but I'm sure his father Tony would disagree.

At the moment, it doesn't really matter as Labour MPs are (largely) strongly 'remain' - so many Labour voters will vote against them regardless.

 

They stand no chance of winning (IMO obviously), so better to wait until after the election and then figure out where to go from there for a leader that has the best chance of winning the support of all Labour voters.

[vogie]

4 minutes ago, Flustered said:

We agree on a lot, but if a party is not electable, then it means their policies are not accepted by the majority. They should then try to explain clearer what it is they stand for or give it up as a lost cause.

 

Blair ruined the Labour party with his swing to the Tory policies and as it was admitted, in the end you could not fit a cigarette paper between them. It was only our dear Gordon who blew Labour out of the water.

 

The country should have a choice between Left, central and Right politics which up until Gordon's destruction of Labour we did not have. All we need now is a centralist party.

As much as I hate Blair, at the time he made the party electable by moving to the right, without him I honestly believe Labour would still be in the wilderness.

 

A left wing party is pointless these days (IMHO) maybe a new new Labour could be formed with the Labour MPs that capitulated and become a middle of the road party.

[vogie]

3 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

At the moment, it doesn't really matter as Labour MPs are (largely) strongly 'remain' - so many Labour voters will vote against them regardless.

 

They stand no chance of winning (IMO obviously), so better to wait until after the election and then figure out where to go from there for a leader that has the best chance of winning the support of all Labour voters.

It does not matter one jot who we think is the best leader for the Labour party, the truth of the matter is who the left wing unions think is better to lead the party on their behalf. 

[sandyf]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

Local elections showing big gains for the Con Party, big losses for labour particularly in England (Corbyn is not leader of Welsh Lab Party). Lib Dems varied - must try harder.

 

Surely Corbyn MUST stand down and enable a real opposition following next months general election 

 

"IN THE NAME OF GOD, GO!"

Not much of a surprise, Labour shot themselves in the foot and TM's sudden U turn never gave them a chance to put a bandage on.

The excuses have started.

 

"Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell has defended Labour's performance in the election saying it was not a "total wipeout".

 

He blamed the media for leader Jeremy Corbyn's unpopularity with the voters and claimed if he had been given a fair hearing then people would have seen what an "honest, decent and principled" leader he would be."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/local-elections-results-latest-news-live-updates-2017-labour-tories-mayoral-council-seats-a7718676.html

[NanLaew]

2 minutes ago, sandyf said:

"Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell has defended Labour's performance in the (local) election saying it was not a "total wipeout".

No. He's saving that accolade for the aftermath of the General Election.

[NanLaew]

4 minutes ago, sandyf said:

"honest, decent and principled"

or,

 

Quote

"mutton-headed old mugwump"

 

These are the tough and vexatious questions in our times.

[sandyf]

4 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

or,

 

 

These are the tough and vexatious questions in our times.

Please do not post something said by someone else under my name, you should have posted the whole quote from John McDonnell.

[mommysboy]

5 hours ago, shanesox said:

The UK economy is doing far better than EU's which is in "slow lane" Fact is the EU membership has proved a drag on UK economy. All indicators are the British economy will thrive outside that "outdated centralised bureaucratic 20th century club" so "way to go" in the wide world


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

This is pure sentiment.  We haven't even left yet, and we are still trading as normal, ie, within the EU. So you might just as well opine that EU membership is a boost to the UK economy.

[mommysboy]

41 minutes ago, Flustered said:

Why? He is a true Socialist. elected under the Labour Party rules.

 

Labour is now the Socialist Party it should have been under Blair.

 

It's called democracy.

England is just not for social democracy, let alone socialism.

 

It's a curious thing- perhaps it's because we tend tend towards moderation anyway.

 

The original nanny state really.

[mommysboy]

7 hours ago, AlexRich said:

I think you've missed the point? Being that the electorate should have been informed, by either side, that there would be money to pay in order to exit the EU. Of course, this would have been labelled "project fear" by the charlatans that gave us £350 million per week extra to spend and who assured us that "they need us more than we need them" ... and other such nonsense. 

 

You would have thought that the Remain camp would at least have mentioned that there was a bill to pay? That would have counteracted the £359 m lie ... did no one know this?

 

The bill is something trumped up by the EU anyway.  Nobody could have foreseen anything so daft.  Silly old Wuncker!

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, Flustered said:

Why? He is a true Socialist. elected under the Labour Party rules.

 

Labour is now the Socialist Party it should have been under Blair.

 

It's called democracy.

And also shows that democracy isn't necessarily ideal...

 

Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.

 

I really feel disenfranchised at the moment. Clark, Benn and Cable could do it.... 

[NanLaew]

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

Please do not post something said by someone else under my name, ...

But BoJo isn't a member here so I had to lift his words from the regular media. Anyway, the automated forum header clearly does NOT attribute his words to you. Clearly two separate quotes.

 

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

... you should have posted the whole quote from John McDonnell.

What? Post the whole, vacuous nonsense when it was only the pure essence of his misguided sentiments that I wish to illuminate? I mean, blaming the media?

Edited May 5, 2017 by NanLaew

[Throatwobbler]

21 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

What on earth are you going on about? It's a report on the latest Markit PMI index for the UK. Markit is not a Murdoch vessel The April figure is 0.6% growth, which is better than the Eurozone growth of 0.5%. If you don't like this statistic, take your concerns up with Markit.

 

Your CNN link, from yesterday, is now out of date. Markit released it's new figures today, and those figures show the UK economy growing faster than that of the Eurozone - FACT.

 

Same story from the Beeb:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39802976

Have you read all the article you quoted or did you just look at headlines.?

This is from the last paragraph of the article you posted. Doubt you made it that far.

But he said that uncertainty and weaker spending power still looked likely to lead to lower growth in the UK economy overall, arguing for rates to remain stable for now.

Are you capable of reading the whole article, No you are not.  FACT. I said it in big letters so it must be true, 

[Khun Han]

33 minutes ago, Throatwobbler said:

Have you read all the article you quoted or did you just look at headlines.?

This is from the last paragraph of the article you posted. Doubt you made it that far.

But he said that uncertainty and weaker spending power still looked likely to lead to lower growth in the UK economy overall, arguing for rates to remain stable for now.

Are you capable of reading the whole article, No you are not.  FACT. I said it in big letters so it must be true, 

 

That the UK's economy is growing faster than the Eurozone's is a FACT. That the UK's economy will slow down/go into recession is SPECULATION. And it's speculation that economic forecasters have been making for the last year, though they are now careful to say that this might happen, so as not to make fools out of themselves like they did last year and have to admit that they were wrong. Which is something you are clearly incapable of doing, in relation to your out-of-date info, and your inept attempt to spin your error into some anti-Murdoch nonsense.

[pegman]

11 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

That the UK's economy is growing faster than the Eurozone's is a FACT. That the UK's economy will slow down/go into recession is SPECULATION. And it's speculation that economic forecasters have been making for the last year, though they are now careful to say that this might happen, so as not to make fools out of themselves like they did last year and have to admit that they were wrong. Which is something you are clearly incapable of doing, in relation to your out-of-date info, and your inept attempt to spin your error into some anti-Murdoch nonsense.

That the EU finance and insurance  industries moves to Frankfurt lock, stock and barrel has already started, FACT! It may take 5 years to complete but there is no chance of it not happening. That my friend will likely cause a depression let alone a recession. This is a very significant portion of the economy in London and England.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-banks-frankfurt-idUSKBN1811GA