May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[Grouse]

8 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Darn.  Nearly 11,000 posts on this one thread.  Well folks, what's the conclusion?  Is the ol' gal ready?

Don't call Brenda that; have some respect!

[Orac]

The Good Friday Agreement  is what makes this possible because it has nothing to do with the EU. It is an Agreement between the British and Irish Governments and as a result if both are in agreement it can be rescinded and to cover your well made point continues along the path of reunification under a "British and Irish United Kingdom" flag. All the pertinent realities of the  Good Friday Agreement can be embraced by a new Union flag.
In 2008 Ireland rejected the Lisbon Treaty however the EU, applied the politics of fear and kept them voting until they got the result they wanted (Remainers refer to this process as Democracy) since the treaty had to be ratified by all member States before it could go into effect. Southern  Ireland is not overwhelmingly EU.
Your argument supposes that the DUP would stop this happening in Parliament. This supposes the other Parties would not vote this through. I don't think that's true.
I do however agree it's a big problem.
I see this as the simplest way forward in terms of process but it's unlikely to be acceptable in political and perhaps emotional terms.

So your solution is because the UK as a whole voted to leave the EU then Ireland, which didn’t get a vote to leave should be forced out to keep the Northern Irish happy who, as a region, did vote to stay in the EU. Your family tree doesn’t trace back to Cromwell does it?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[aright]

2 minutes ago, Orac said:

 

 

So your solution is because the UK as a whole voted to leave the EU then Ireland, which didn’t get a vote to leave should be forced out to keep the Northern Irish happy who, as a region, did vote to stay in the EU. Your family tree doesn’t trace back to Cromwell does it?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

Your reading skills leave a lot to be desired. Where did I say forced?

I said" if the British and Irish Governments are in agreement"

That is the antithesis of forced

[Orac]

Your reading skills leave a lot to be desired. Where did I say forced?
I said" if the British and Irish Governments are in agreement"
That is the antithesis of forced

So you really think the people of Ireland would agree to leaving the EU to rejoin the U.K.?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[aright]

2 minutes ago, Orac said:

 

 

So you really think the people of Ireland would agree to leaving the EU to rejoin the U.K.?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

It will depend on their perceived benefit to risk ratio.

[Orac]

It will depend on their perceived benefit to risk ratio.

 

Should such a referendum be allowed in Ireland it is virtually guaranteed that there would two conditions attached so as “the will of the people” can be ascertained. Firstly the GFA would mean the people of NI would have to be included and secondly that they would need to be given the choice of status quo with border, all in UK or all in EU which the U.K. would not allow as it risks NI being taken out of the U.K. against its will. It is politically impossible to achieve and even formally suggesting it would quite literally blow up in the TMs face.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[sandyf]

21 hours ago, aright said:

Not the rules again. I had a post withdrawn because you claimed I made a personal attack on you when in reality I was attacking your ideas not you personally. It seems whenever you get on the wrong side of an argument you call on the rules to save you. Oversensitive, heat, kitchen and out come to mind.

Obviously you would find quoting just part of a post to change the context quite acceptable. Easier than addressing the point in question.

[sandyf]

20 hours ago, aright said:

It's not as convoluted as you make it out to be although it's in the interest of Remainers to make it so.. The US example was to show popular democracy is alive and kicking. If it is a myth perhaps you could explain what brand of politics has increased significantly the votes for far right parties in the EU?  As for parliament....They endorsed Brexit by 469 votes to 89 ( yes I know Remainers will regard this a close vote)  and you are now suggesting they will betray the will of the people . If they do welcome to the khilafat

I will repeat what I said the decision has been made and you must learn to live with that

If want to believe the UK is not a parliamentary democracy, feel free. You are also perfectly free to believe the decision is cast in stone.

 

The row comes after the former diplomat Lord Kerr, the legal expert who wrote Article 50, said during a speech that the country “still has a free choice about whether to proceed” with Brexit. 

“As new facts emerge, people are entitled to take a different view. And there’s nothing in Article 50 to stop them,” he said.

“I think the British people have the right to know this – they should not be misled.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-minister-lord-callanan-apology-article-50-irreversible-supreme-court-ruling-david-davis-uk-a8065591.html

 

 

[sandyf]

Brexiteers worst nightmare.

 

That seems right, but try to imagine what would happen if the Government came to the House of Commons and said that no satisfactory Brexit deal had been struck and sought approval for crashing out, and the Commons refused. We should then have reached a state of total chaos that could only be resolved by an immediate general election or a second referendum. And that is the scenario in which Brexit might be taken off the table and we should then return to those peaceful days when the mad idea of holding a referendum hadn’t even been considered.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-reverse-vote-eu-withdrawal-act-stop-remain-parliament-commons-a8054461.html

[aright]

36 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Obviously you would find quoting just part of a post to change the context quite acceptable. Easier than addressing the point in question.

Well done! You didn't even get the right post.

[aright]

24 minutes ago, sandyf said:

If want to believe the UK is not a parliamentary democracy, feel free. You are also perfectly free to believe the decision is cast in stone.

 

The row comes after the former diplomat Lord Kerr, the legal expert who wrote Article 50, said during a speech that the country “still has a free choice about whether to proceed” with Brexit. 

“As new facts emerge, people are entitled to take a different view. And there’s nothing in Article 50 to stop them,” he said.

“I think the British people have the right to know this – they should not be misled.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-minister-lord-callanan-apology-article-50-irreversible-supreme-court-ruling-david-davis-uk-a8065591.html

 

 

 

25 minutes ago, sandyf said:

If it is a myth perhaps you could explain what brand of politics has increased significantly the votes for far right parties in the EU?  

Try answering some of the questions.

[aright]

45 minutes ago, Orac said:

 

Should such a referendum be allowed in Ireland it is virtually guaranteed that there would two conditions attached so as “the will of the people” can be ascertained. Firstly the GFA would mean the people of NI would have to be included and secondly that they would need to be given the choice of status quo with border, all in UK or all in EU which the U.K. would not allow as it risks NI being taken out of the U.K. against its will. It is politically impossible to achieve and even formally suggesting it would quite literally blow up in the TMs face.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

I'm not sure what the Gospel for Asia have got to do with it ?  What's your solution then?

[Orac]

I'm not sure what the Gospel for Asia have got to do with it ?  What's your solution then?

 

Good Friday Agreement as well you know. I don’t have a solution hence why I didn’t vote for it.

 

Edit: Actually, thinking about it, the best option could be to throw this back to the people on NI - a referendum on whether they should stay in the UK with the hard EU border that may materialise or reunite with Ireland and remain in the EU. There are no easy options here but letting the people decide might break the political logjam.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Khun Han]

9 hours ago, SheungWan said:

The best solution to not understanding is to just make something up.

 

You must have missed Tomacht's rather 'out there' post, where he claimed that, for the classic model of economics to work properly, people would have to travel to point-of-sale to purchase (such as traveling to Spain to buy the cheapest vibrators). Go back and read it and see if you can make any sense of it. If you can, do the forum a favour and translate it into English.

[sandyf]

54 minutes ago, Orac said:

 

Should such a referendum be allowed in Ireland it is virtually guaranteed that there would two conditions attached so as “the will of the people” can be ascertained. Firstly the GFA would mean the people of NI would have to be included and secondly that they would need to be given the choice of status quo with border, all in UK or all in EU which the U.K. would not allow as it risks NI being taken out of the U.K. against its will. It is politically impossible to achieve and even formally suggesting it would quite literally blow up in the TMs face.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

The GFA allows the right to self determination as a united Ireland.

 

(iv) affirm that if, in the future, the people of the island of Ireland exercise
their right of self-determination on the basis set out in sections (i) and (ii)
above to bring about a united Ireland, it will be a binding obligation on
both Governments to introduce and support in their respective Parliaments
legislation to give effect to that wish;

 

It also puts both parts of Ireland under the EHCR.

 

(b) the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and any Bill of
Rights for Northern Ireland supplementing it, which neither the Assembly
nor public bodies can infringe, together with a Human Rights
Commission;

 

And it also incorporates EU policies and programmes

 

17. The Council to consider the European Union dimension of relevant
matters, including the implementation of EU policies and programmes
and proposals under consideration in the EU framework. Arrangements to
be made to ensure that the views of the Council are taken into account and
represented appropriately at relevant EU meetings.

 

The court case focused on the GFA and Article 50 and the judgement was that nothing in the GFA actually referred to EU membership so the case was dismissed. However there has been little reference to one of the main issues, EU funding.

 

By far the most significant of the North-South bodies is the Special European Union Programmes Body (SEUPB), which manages cross-border EU structural funds. The SEUPB implements the EU Programme for Peace and Reconciliation in Northern Ireland, which has amounted to four peace programmes financially underwriting the peace process, providing 1.5 billion euros of funding. The UK Treasury has pledged to underwrite the remaining EU Peace IV and INTERREG programme money, to be paid up to 2020, in the event of prior EU withdrawal. The EU peace projects have helped diminish the border’s salience, vastly improved cross-border transport links and brought the two main communities together in seeking joint funding. The current Peace IV programme is due to expire in 2020, but an earlier Brexit could see the curtailment or abandonment of several projects.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/583116/IPOL_BRI(2017)583116_EN.pdf

 

[Khun Han]

5 hours ago, SheungWan said:

Today FT Announcement: EU Banking regulator moving from London to Paris, EU Medicines Agency moving from London to Amsterdam post-Brexit.

 

Is this 'news' supposed to have some significance?

[aright]

8 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Is this 'news' supposed to have some significance?

For Pickfords yes!

[tomacht8]

19 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

You must have missed Tomacht's rather 'out there' post, where he claimed that, for the classic model of economics to work properly, people would have to travel to point-of-sale to purchase (such as traveling to Spain to buy the cheapest vibrators). Go back and read it and see if you can make any sense of it. If you can, do the forum a favour and translate it into English.

Oh dear,
you have no glue about theoretical, macroeconomic models.
You just do not know what a premise in an economic model is.
No problems with space and distance bridging is one from five premises.
And without realizing it, you certify the model from Minford, thus a rejection. Because exactly this example with Spain shows that his model is just a theoretical one.

Edited November 21, 2017 by tomacht8

[sandyf]

5 hours ago, SheungWan said:

Today FT Announcement: EU Banking regulator moving from London to Paris, EU Medicines Agency moving from London to Amsterdam post-Brexit.

Estimate on the EMA relocation is likely to cost the UK 580 million Euros, but DD said it wouldn't happen. It is not just the loss of the agencies, the EMA is estimated at having over 35,000 visitors a year, all requiring food and accommodation.

 

The agencies’ previous location in the UK recognised Britain’s role as a financial and pharmaceutical industry superpower within the EU. In April, Brexit Secretary David Davis wrongly said the agencies would be able to stay in Britain after Brexit.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-netherlands-amsterdam-ema-benefit-eu-agencies-relocate-from-uk-london-european-council-a8066191.html

 

The bill Britain must pay for moving the European Medicines Agency (EMA) from London after Brexit has soared to a staggering £520m, it has emerged.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-european-medicines-agency-move-london-eu-cost-bill-520-million-nhs-europe-a7873226.html

 

[tomacht8]

9 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Estimate on the EMA relocation is likely to cost the UK 580 million Euros, but DD said it wouldn't happen. It is not just the loss of the agencies, the EMA is estimated at having over 35,000 visitors a year, all requiring food and accommodation.

 

The agencies’ previous location in the UK recognised Britain’s role as a financial and pharmaceutical industry superpower within the EU. In April, Brexit Secretary David Davis wrongly said the agencies would be able to stay in Britain after Brexit.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-netherlands-amsterdam-ema-benefit-eu-agencies-relocate-from-uk-london-european-council-a8066191.html

 

The bill Britain must pay for moving the European Medicines Agency (EMA) from London after Brexit has soared to a staggering £520m, it has emerged.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-european-medicines-agency-move-london-eu-cost-bill-520-million-nhs-europe-a7873226.html

 

Furthermore, the UK is probably forced to build its own pharmaceutical control center to avoid that people may not have to eat rat poison tablets from dubious sources. The whole thing is quite research and staff intensive and therefore quite expensive. Normally sharing these costs with many countries makes sense. 

Edited November 21, 2017 by tomacht8

[sandyf]

15 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

Oh dear,
you have no glue about theoretical, macroeconomic models.
You just do not know what a premise in an economic model is.
No problems with space and distance bridging is one from five premises.
And without realizing it, you certify the model from Minford, thus a rejection. Because exactly this example with Spain shows that his model is just a theoretical one.

Quite, I remember the days of Certificates of Origin and Certificates of Conformance, not something we should go back to.

 

 

[sandyf]

7 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

Furthermore, the UK is probably forced to build its own pharmaceutical control center to avoid that people may not have to eat rat poison tablets from dubious sources. The whole thing is quite research and staff intensive and therefore quite expensive.

Exactly, regulatory equivalence is something that has yet to raise its head in the brexit debate.

Many of the large pharmaceuticals are located in the UK because of the EMA, they may well be looking to Amsterdam now its been decided.

[tomacht8]

3 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Quite, I remember the days of Certificates of Origin and Certificates of Conformance, not something we should go back to.

 

 

To avoid this is certainly the goal of the negotiations.
I also remember the paperwork well. At that time, for a good friend, I bought children's jeans clothes in Bangkok and imported them to Germany for their small shop.
Have never seen before at the customs the thick book with the product groups and commodity numbers.
A nightmare. In the end, we paid a lot of customs and import sales tax.
The tariffs have also been different, depending on whether import quotas existed or not.
If there is no agreement or transitional period, it will come  that the trade is severely hampered.
That will be good for nobody.

[talahtnut]

On 11/20/2017 at 1:54 PM, SheungWan said:

Oh, so that's the forum Hard Brexiteer plan for the future of UK international trade. Stick everything on ebay. Welcome to the Noddy School of Economics.

You are very good at sneering, but you missed the point.  The UK should be outward looking for trade..as I do.  If Germany drops out of the EU, the EU is dead in the water... Whatever happens the ultimate power of the international financial hegemony will pervade.  

[Khun Han]

1 hour ago, tomacht8 said:

Oh dear,
you have no glue about theoretical, macroeconomic models.
You just do not know what a premise in an economic model is.
No problems with space and distance bridging is one from five premises.
And without realizing it, you certify the model from Minford, thus a rejection. Because exactly this example with Spain shows that his model is just a theoretical one.

 

If you're trying to argue that transportation is a major issue in trade, then you are living in the nineteenth century (and the classic model worked absolutely fine back then btw).

[Basil B]

22 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

If you're trying to argue that transportation is a major issue in trade, then you are living in the nineteenth century (and the classic model worked absolutely fine back then btw).

So how many tons of jet fuel does take to fly a ton of strawberries from California or a ton of lamb from New Zealand???

 

I do not know but I am no fool and know it is a lot more the from our neighbours in the EU.

 

You sir are living in the 20th century when we did not care about pouting the earth, well we are now in the 21st century.

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, aright said:

It will depend on their perceived benefit to risk ratio.

I'll bet they remember more history than you do! Beyond the pale?

[Khun Han]

10 minutes ago, Basil B said:

So how many tons of jet fuel does take to fly a ton of strawberries from California or a ton of lamb from New Zealand???

 

I do not know but I am no fool and know it is a lot more the from our neighbours in the EU.

 

You sir are living in the 20th century when we did not care about pouting the earth, well we are now in the 21st century.

 

Fruit is cheaper from places like South America than it is from France and Spain (once you take out the punitive EU tariffs). And you might have noticed that manufactured goods are exponentially cheaper from asia (particularly China) than they are from Europe. So much so, that most of the west's marquee companies pay asian factories to manufacture their goods, then ship them to western countries re-branded and priced accordingly. Which shows that paticular 'rule' of gravity economics to be the load of <deleted> that it is.

[Grouse]

5 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Fruit is cheaper from places like South America than it is from France and Spain (once you take out the punitive EU tariffs). And you might have noticed that manufactured goods are exponentially cheaper from asia (particularly China) than they are from Europe. So much so, that most of the west's marquee companies pay asian factories to manufacture their goods, then ship them to western countries re-branded and priced accordingly. Which shows that paticular 'rule' of gravity economics to be the load of <deleted> that it is.

So you're in favour of unrestrained global economics? The Brexiteers will love you ?. You know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Moronic.

 

(and for god's sake look up what exponential actual means)

Edited November 21, 2017 by Grouse

[tomacht8]

2 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Fruit is cheaper from places like South America than it is from France and Spain (once you take out the punitive EU tariffs). And you might have noticed that manufactured goods are exponentially cheaper from asia (particularly China) than they are from Europe. So much so, that most of the west's marquee companies pay asian factories to manufacture their goods, then ship them to western countries re-branded and priced accordingly. Which shows that paticular 'rule' of gravity economics to be the load of <deleted> that it is.

Well, I'm clapping my hands for joy.
Why do not you explain that to the UK farmers?
Why do not you explain that to the UK industry and everyone who works there and earns their living?