May ready for tough talks over Brexit

[billd766]

5 hours ago, soalbundy said:

they would want another referendum.

 

Yes I would. and even the best of 5, 7 or even 9.

[dick dasterdly]

5 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

Let's hypothesise for a moment, if there was a second referendum and the vote came in at say, 63% Remain, 37% Brexit, just as an example, what would Team Brexit blame the result on and would they accept it? Would they say it was rigged by the establishment or similar?

Of course they would, as a close to immediate second referendum on exactly the same issue only points to one thing - manipulation....

 

Having said this, doubtless they would have to wait a few decades before getting another referendum.

[Laughing Gravy]

37 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Which begs the question - why did he say this in the first place?

I hope it was a Freudian slip. I have watched it and I can see his frustration from the constant moaning of those who will not accept the result to still crying over the 350 million a week to the NHS. Either way it wasn't his finest moment.

[Laughing Gravy]

15 hours ago, Orac said:

 

 

Nigel realises he has become irrelevant and is trying to stir the pot so he can jump back on his UKIP bandwagon.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

Or maybe he knows something we don't after meeting Barnier this week?

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, Laughing Gravy said:

 

Or maybe he knows something we don't after meeting Barnier this week?

In which case he would have been 'calling for' a 2nd referendum on the 'leave agreement' - rather than another referendum asking exactly the same question?

[Orac]

 
Or maybe he knows something we don't after meeting Barnier this week?

Such as what - that a ‘no deal’ is a distinct possibility so wants to get a 2nd referendum done before things get really bad?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, Orac said:

 

Such as what - that a ‘no deal’ is a distinct possibility so wants to get a 2nd referendum done before things get really bad?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

I've been posting for a long time that it doesn't suit UK politicians personal interests to leave the EU - so another referendum including the option 'leave now under WTO terms' (once the final agreement has been announced) would probably be a good idea .

[Laughing Gravy]

18 minutes ago, Orac said:

 

 

Such as what - that a ‘no deal’ is a distinct possibility so wants to get a 2nd referendum done before things get really bad?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

I don't know I don't have a crystal ball. I personally would be happy with a no deal than giving everything away for nothing that is happening now.

 

I can speculate and think that he might be thinking that another referendum might get a prime minister in power who will actually do what originally was told to everyone. Out of the EU, out of the customs union and single market. Which presently doesn't look like will happen.

[Orac]

I've been posting for a long time that it doesn't suit UK politicians personal interests to leave the EU - so another referendum including the option 'leave now under WTO terms' (once the final agreement has been announced) would probably be a good idea .

Surely such a referendum would also require a remain option as well which would end up being the clear favourite if the leave options were split between agreement and WTO?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[dick dasterdly]

Just now, Orac said:

 

Surely such a referendum would also require a remain option as well which would end up being the clear favourite if the leave options were split between agreement and WTO?


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

Too late for that.

 

The options would have to be accept the 'negotiated deal' or 'leave immediately under WTO terms'.

 

Of course it's possible that EU leaders would declare that the UK could remain with exactly the same terms - making a slightly harder choice.

[sandyf]

39 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Too late for that.

 

The options would have to be accept the 'negotiated deal' or 'leave immediately under WTO terms'.

 

Of course it's possible that EU leaders would declare that the UK could remain with exactly the same terms - making a slightly harder choice.

The problem here is that nobody knows what "WTO terms" actually means. As part of the EU the UK is a dependent member of the WTO and has no trade profile, the UK cannot become an independent member until after it leaves the EU and that in itself is not the real problem.

 

The intention to “apportion” the EU’s existing agricultural quota commitments based on trade flows had already been leaked to other WTO members, seven of whom fired a pre-emptive warning shot in their own letter last week.

 

Without unanimous approval of Britain’s new membership terms at the 164-member WTO, any country could launch a lengthy trade dispute if they feel their trading interests have been damaged.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-wto/uk-eu-send-proposal-to-rest-of-wto-to-split-trade-terms-idUSKBN1CG1E7

[soalbundy]

wait 5 years and the oldies like me will have died out and the young who have a future and a vested interest in Europe would vote rejoin, the pound would have to be ditched of course but that would be a win for the worth of the Euro, that is my prediction for what will happen and the flag wavers who voted leave can then go back to watching 'East Enders' and 'Big Brother'.

[vogie]

1 minute ago, soalbundy said:

wait 5 years and the oldies like me will have died out and the young who have a future and a vested interest in Europe would vote rejoin, the pound would have to be ditched of course but that would be a win for the worth of the Euro, that is my prediction for what will happen and the flag wavers who voted leave can then go back to watching 'East Enders' and 'Big Brother'.

Another wanabe Mother Shipton.

[soalbundy]

3 minutes ago, vogie said:

Another wanabe Mother Shipton.

She was right in a lot of things, I just think it is the most likely outcome, it's going to end in tears financially, and as for 'freedom' what a laugh, serfs bickering about who they want as lord of the manor, they can't even stop the freebee's in the house of lords, can't reform the NHS, the worst pensions in Western Europe, the most expensive fares for public transport and unmitigated violence on the streets, of course it's all the fault of the EU.

[aright]

1 hour ago, soalbundy said:

wait 5 years and the oldies like me will have died out and the young who have a future and a vested interest in Europe would vote rejoin, 

If you are going to use that argument do you advocate withdrawing the vote from anyone  over 65 because they are all in God's waiting room and have no real future? Is that what you want, democracy, but only for the young and by definition the least experienced?

[simoh1490]

1 minute ago, aright said:

If you are going to use that argument do you advocate withdrawing the vote from anyone  over 65 because they are all in God's waiting room and have no real future? Is that what you want, democracy, but only for the young and by definition the least experienced?

If by definition you infer that older people are more experienced hance the wisest, weren't they in the majority who voted to Remain?

[aright]

You assume their is only one wisdom. If that were so we could all stop thinking.With experience comes wisdom but in our case their are two wisdoms yours and mine and it may well be our wisdoms differ because of different IQ's and/or life experiences. Anyway I was responding to a poster who felt Britain's future would have a better outcome if controlled by the young.  

When it came to the last general election 66% of 18-19 yr olds  and 62% of 20-24 yr olds voted for Corbyn.

It's certainly democratic but do you call that wise?  QED

 

[soalbundy]

Just now, aright said:

If you are going to use that argument do you advocate withdrawing the vote from anyone  over 65 because they are all in God's waiting room and have no real future? Is that what you want, democracy, but only for the young and by definition the least experienced?

No of course not, let them die out naturally. The old that I refer to are ones like me who sat in the class room learning history where a lot of the world was cloured pink, 'British Empire'. Some of us traveled widely, worked in other countries, got to know other cultures and so grew up and left our 'by jingoism' behind, became if you like, emancipated, others chose to stay in their green and pleasant land, support their football,rugby,cricket teams, sing 'How green is my valley' 'Rule Brittania' and 'Scotland the brave' and get teary eyed on the last night of the proms. A restricted horizon of 'British is best', they know no better, how could they ? it was fed into them with their breast milk and they made no effort, or couldn't make an effort to look over the horizon. The young and some of us oldies were fortunate enough to be able to widen our horizons. Leave steals a better future from the young and for the country in general. Unless you are thick,uneducated or have an adventurous sort of blood lust nobody these days will go over the top for king and country waving the flag. We want peace and prosperity which can only be achieved with close links to our neighbours. Just read the comments from leavers in the daily rags, "the cowardly French' 'can't trust Germany,what about the war' etc. the blinds are down,Hollywood won.

[simoh1490]

5 minutes ago, aright said:

You assume their is only one wisdom. If that were so we could all stop thinking.With experience comes wisdom but in our case their are two wisdoms yours and mine and it may well be our wisdoms differ because of different IQ's and/or life experiences. Anyway I was responding to a poster who felt Britain's future would have a better outcome if controlled by the young.  

When it came to the last general election 66% of 18-19 yr olds  and 62% of 20-24 yr olds voted for Corbyn.

It's certainly democratic but do you call that wise?  QED

 

An excellent answer, although I'm not sure that an issue such as Brexit requires a Plato level of thought. The picture might be more clear if only we could remove from the equation the number of people in search of change at any cost, since that view circumvents wisdom almost entirely.

[Jip99]

7 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

An excellent answer, although I'm not sure that an issue such as Brexit requires a Plato level of thought. The picture might be more clear if only we could remove from the equation the number of people in search of change at any cost, since that view circumvents wisdom almost entirely.

 

 

I think you are all thinking too much.

 

Thailand is a good example; you can have democracy (at certain times) but a vote does not come with any conditions, training, wisdom, foresight, examination nor can it be barred for extremism. In fact it can be bought for 500 Baht. So what value does it have ?

 

I would suggest the same as the UK - it represents 1 of 32,000,000.

 

It is worth "1" whether you are rich, poor, smart or stupid. Everyone's vote is therefore equal.

 

It becomes interesting when you get groups of voters i.e. in Isaan, or UK students, or Buckingham.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, soalbundy said:

No of course not, let them die out naturally. The old that I refer to are ones like me who sat in the class room learning history where a lot of the world was cloured pink, 'British Empire'. Some of us traveled widely, worked in other countries, got to know other cultures and so grew up and left our 'by jingoism' behind, became if you like, emancipated, others chose to stay in their green and pleasant land, support their football,rugby,cricket teams, sing 'How green is my valley' 'Rule Brittania' and 'Scotland the brave' and get teary eyed on the last night of the proms. A restricted horizon of 'British is best', they know no better, how could they ? it was fed into them with their breast milk and they made no effort, or couldn't make an effort to look over the horizon. The young and some of us oldies were fortunate enough to be able to widen our horizons. Leave steals a better future from the young and for the country in general. Unless you are thick,uneducated or have an adventurous sort of blood lust nobody these days will go over the top for king and country waving the flag. We want peace and prosperity which can only be achieved with close links to our neighbours. Just read the comments from leavers in the daily rags, "the cowardly French' 'can't trust Germany,what about the war' etc. the blinds are down,Hollywood won.

Glad we may have your blessing to have the chance to go naturally and peacefully. But the references to empire and all the rest of it is a load of old cobras! The UK seniors are trying to protect the juniors from this form of continental "union" which is destined to be no better than a clique-dictatorship. They can see that the formation of the EU so far has been largely enabled by the deception of EU and national political "leaders". If the EU succeeds in forming itself into the single superstate that it wants to be by 2025, or whenever, it will be forever ripping itself to pieces again. It won't be pretty and it needs to stop now. 

 

Maybe try v 2.0 in 50 years or so?  

 

[soalbundy]

Just now, nauseus said:

Glad we may have your blessing to have the chance to go naturally and peacefully. But the references to empire and all the rest of it is a load of old cobras! The UK seniors are trying to protect the juniors from this form of continental "union" which is destined to be no better than a clique-dictatorship. They can see that the formation of the EU so far has been largely enabled by the deception of EU and national political "leaders". If the EU succeeds in forming itself into the single superstate that it wants to be by 2025, or whenever, it will be forever ripping itself to pieces again. It won't be pretty and it needs to stop now. 

 

Maybe try v 2.0 in 50 years or so?  

 

I'm hoping for a super state, why should it rip itself apart, China and America are basically just super states, they both were once many separate states and in the case of China there are ethnic and language differences. As for clique dictatorship what do you think the UK is, it's a merry go round full of people far removed from the worries of the local plebs, silver spoons and public schools. Compared to the past all the European countries including the UK (Scotland,Wales,Northern Ireland,England, go back further and they were even more split up into different kingdoms) are super states, Germany was only relatively recently a united country under Bismark ( don't forget the war) The EU is just evolution.

[simoh1490]

1 minute ago, soalbundy said:

I'm hoping for a super state, why should it rip itself apart, China and America are basically just super states, they both were once many separate states and in the case of China there are ethnic and language differences. As for clique dictatorship what do you think the UK is, it's a merry go round full of people far removed from the worries of the local plebs, silver spoons and public schools. Compared to the past all the European countries including the UK (Scotland,Wales,Northern Ireland,England, go back further and they were even more split up into different kingdoms) are super states, Germany was only relatively recently a united country under Bismark ( don't forget the war) The EU is just evolution.

The parallel with China is excellent, as is the post.

[aright]

28 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

The parallel with China is excellent, as is the post.

Your parallel with China is discomforting. China is more George Orwell than George Orwell and the EU with its political democratic deficit is moving that way.

For the UK to remain in the UK would be particularly perverse, since not even our political elites wish to see this country absorbed into a United States of Europe 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/02/the-eu-exists-only-to-become-a-superstate-britain-has-no-place-i/

[simoh1490]

6 hours ago, aright said:

Your parallel with China is discomforting. China is more George Orwell than George Orwell and the EU with its political democratic deficit is moving that way.

For the UK to remain in the UK would be particularly perverse, since not even our political elites wish to see this country absorbed into a United States of Europe 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/02/the-eu-exists-only-to-become-a-superstate-britain-has-no-place-i/

Clustering is one of mankinds basic instincts, towns and cities develop as a result, think safety. Ditto in marketing, like businesses cluster for better results, think shopping malls.

 

In 1860 there was 34 US states, today there are 50.

 

The political elites today may not want to be absorbed into Europe, but the idea that it might be one day is no longer an alien concept.

[aright]

2 hours ago, simoh1490 said:

Clustering is one of mankinds basic instincts, towns and cities develop as a result, think safety. Ditto in marketing, like businesses cluster for better results, think shopping malls.

 

In 1860 there was 34 US states, today there are 50.

 

The political elites today may not want to be absorbed into Europe, but the idea that it might be one day is no longer an alien concept.

Yes the USA is a success story States however are not countries and they do have State laws that suit their needs. They also speak the same language and have a common political and social culture and a widely respected nationwide flag.

The EU countries however do not have a common language or culture and each has a country flag which has far more significance than the EU flag. This lack of commonality has already started an implosion as evidenced by Brexit, Catalonia, Poland, Hungary, Corsica, an immigration policy in shreds, high unemployment, basket countries, the rise of extreme right wing politics etc. Why would anyone in the UK, elite or prole, want into this morass.

Let's not forget the USSR was formed by 15 countries  in 1922 and disbanded, a complete failure, in 1991. Once again the 15 countries had no language , cultural or flag commonality and a predominant wealthy country in the group. A bit like Germany really.

" An alien concept"? I think so.

 

  

 

[simoh1490]

It seems to me countries that are islands are typically not as economically successful as countries that are joined with others. The exception is where the island country has a strong economic connection with the neighbouring countries such as in the case of Singapore and Malaysia, Taiwan & China, New Zealand & Australia and Japan & China/Korea. If those things are true, the evidence is that we need a good trading relationship with Europe, in fact, it's probably essential to our economic survival, the only question is, how close should that relationship be. Clearly, when we joined the EU we believed it should be closer not farther, now we believe it should be the opposite, my sense is we think that for the wrong reasons, baby & bathwater and all that.

 

 

[aright]

11 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

It seems to me countries that are islands are typically not as economically successful as countries that are joined with others. 

 

Clearly, when we joined the EU we believed it should be closer not farther, now we believe it should be the opposite, my sense is we think that for the wrong reasons, baby & bathwater and all that.

 

 

The most successful world economy was an island country.....the UK.

Prior to World War 1 they had global pre-eminence, in terms of territory the British Empire was immense. It all changed at the end of the war with the UK having to repay America £900 million (small by todays standards) in war loans. As a result Britain's world wide investments had to be cashed in and its coal and cotton exports collapsed. The world was then taken over by  the USA's overwhelming industrial might. Had World war 1 not happened we might still be the worlds leading economy. 

 

When we joined the Common Market it was a trading concept and slowly by subterfuge the powers decided  to  give the EU "Political Poise"...that's not what I want because I don't regard the Union as democratic. It doesn't have to be baby and bathwater its not what we want, but only negotiations will tell us what we get. 

[simoh1490]

2 minutes ago, aright said:

The most successful world economy was an island country.....the UK.

Prior to World War 1 they had global pre-eminence, in terms of territory the British Empire was immense. It all changed at the end of the war with the UK having to repay America £900 million (small by todays standards) in war loans. As a result Britain's world wide investments had to be cashed in and its coal and cotton exports collapsed. The world was then taken over by  the USA's overwhelming industrial might. Had World war 1 not happened we might still be the worlds leading economy. 

 

When we joined the Common Market it was a trading concept and slowly by subterfuge the powers decided  to  give the EU "Political Poise"...that's not what I want because I don't regard the Union as democratic. It doesn't have to be baby and bathwater its not what we want, but only negotiations will tell us what we get. 

Was.....Prior to World War II......if World War I hadn't happened, oh dear!

[aright]

3 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

Was.....Prior to World War II......if World War I hadn't happened, oh dear!

Can you fill in the gaps and implications?