Wonder about the look on May's face after Tusk suggesting Corbyn's plan.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
What we informally call the single market is in fact the EEA, it's made of EFTA and the EU. The CU is the custom territory of the EU, Andorra, Monaco and San Marino, Turkey are partially integrated to it when it comes to agricultural goods. In both the EEA and EUCU, member states share their territory which means that everyone is involved in the decision made about what rules apply, who gets in and how, one is strictly about actual trades the other is about their control and registrations.
So I can't objectively answer your second question what one sees as a downside is very subjective, while the UK could see independent trades as a downside, Belgium could see it as a perk.
Would love to see Tusk belt out "oh Jeremy Corbyn"
Your toryism knows no boundries. What is it you actually want?
I don't really care - I'm just an observer pointing out the problems.
It's a fascinating story of voluntary self-destruction.
John Major was the last PM I voted for so Toryism is history unless you're a Blairite.
As regards May and Corbyn - they are the two most atrocious leaders of their parties in my lifetime and that's saying something.
Still he is right and what of the main reasons I don't like EU, The financial crisis showed the true colours of the Union and if a Brexiteer would base his reasons on that and how the EU treated the immigrants, I would understand...if the UK would not do exactly the same, of course
@JPRouve explained it.
Actually the biggest problem is going to be with the UK parliament, imagine the Tory Brexiters being told they had no control over tariffs, I can see JRM's face now.
What about the ECJ, freedom of movement. Almost all the reasons for Brexit are wiped away by Corbyn.
You made the distinction a/the
Being in the CU/SM would remove the need for the backstop, I don't think Corbyn meant that and I think Tusk, if he said it, thought he did.
Here's a pro hard Brexit argument I don't get:
The UK needs to leave the EU and strike up it's own trade deals with the rest of the world because WTO terms aren't good enough. But a no deal Brexit means we'll be on WTO terms with our biggest trade partner, the EU.
This makes no sense to me. Am I missing something?
The UK needs to leave the EU and strike up it's own trade deals with the rest of the world because WTO terms aren't good enough. But a no deal Brexit means we'll be on WTO terms with our biggest trade partner, the EU.
This makes no sense to me. Am I missing something?
Not only with the EU but the rest of the world including the countries that the UK did have trade deals whilst inside the EU.
None of it makes sense.
Mogg wants to eliminate tariffs but even if he could why would anyone need a trade deal. What he really means is that expects the rest of the world to dance to the UK's tune.
Britain wants a pink unicorn and the EU are saying pink is fine but it is the unicorn bit that is impossible.
You can't time limit the backstop because there isn't another condition in there relating what will allow it to end. Tory Brexiteers won't allow it.
Then blame the EU. We negotiate like our only objective is to stop a giant toddler throwing a tantrum.
Surly Teenager: "I'm starving"
Patient Mother: "I'll start dinner, what would you like?"
ST: "Don't care"
PM: "Come on now, what would you like and I'll make it".
ST: "Don't care"
PM: "How about I do Bangers and Mash, you love that"
ST: "No I don't want it"
PM: "You're going to have to tell me what you do want so"
ST: "Fine I'll have Lobster and Caviar"
PM: "Come on now, you're being unreasonable"
ST: "FINE! I'll starve"
PM: "OK, suit yourself"
ST: "You want me to starve! That was your plan all along!"
PM: "I don't want you to starve but I can't make anything until you tell me what you want.
ST: "I told you but you never listen!"
PM: "I'm listening now, what would you like?"
ST: "Don't care"
PM: "Stop being such a little shit!"
ST: "Oh my God I can't believe how abusive you are being. I'm calling child protective services"
Patient Mother: "I'll start dinner, what would you like?"
ST: "Don't care"
PM: "Come on now, what would you like and I'll make it".
ST: "Don't care"
PM: "How about I do Bangers and Mash, you love that"
ST: "No I don't want it"
PM: "You're going to have to tell me what you do want so"
ST: "Fine I'll have Lobster and Caviar"
PM: "Come on now, you're being unreasonable"
ST: "FINE! I'll starve"
PM: "OK, suit yourself"
ST: "You want me to starve! That was your plan all along!"
PM: "I don't want you to starve but I can't make anything until you tell me what you want.
ST: "I told you but you never listen!"
PM: "I'm listening now, what would you like?"
ST: "Don't care"
PM: "Stop being such a little shit!"
ST: "Oh my God I can't believe how abusive you are being. I'm calling child protective services"
Except you are looking at the proximate cause rather than the ultimate cause. The fundamental flaw is that leaving at all is an idiotically destructive act.
Thatch and Major were the worst, Blair part one was good. Corbyn has never been pm so doesn't really count. Wasn't Hague once party leader? What a total cnut he was.
I meant as politicians rather than policies. I despised Blair's reign as PM but he was an intelligent politician.
IDS was awful as well.
There is nothing appealing about May as a politician and Corbyn reminds me of an unintelligent version of Michael Foot who I also thought was hopeless.
Why disaster capitalists are praying for a no-deal Brexit
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...saster-capitalists-no-deal-brexit-environment
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...saster-capitalists-no-deal-brexit-environment
I've been talking to quite a lot of my students about this angle of it all. They are fascinated by it, far far away from it as they are.
For a while now I've felt that this is the Brexit endgame for those that really pull the strings. Brexit being a major step towards getting rid of environmental protections, other things such as food standards, workers rights and lowering taxes. Essentially getting rid of any laws/policies/rights that stand in the way of big business making a quick buck.
Don’t forget the gold
Well the eu seem keen on the unintelligent guys suggestions so what does that make them?
That's already been covered above. Staying in the CU/SM is quite acceptable as a solution with the proviso that the UK accepts the responsibilities and everything that comes with it. Don't believe Corbyn meant that. Vague as usual.
His letter doesn't seem to be going down too well with certain sections of his party either.
Furthermore do you seriously think that will please the Brexiters or the Remainers.
Lot of bollox about environment, nobody cares, no country does anything about it anyway.
You dont care how his party feels, you care about a smooth transition, if this goes down, feck it, who cares?
I meant in parliament
Wait and see. Wont go down well with torys i spect. I'd prefer no deal myself. Just to see the panic.
We will though. That’s sort of the point.
With the current meetings, isn't it just a case for agreeing a threshold (criteria) for when the backstop could be removed "with technology" or some other solution?
This is then takenback to parliament and the vote goes better than last time. Even if the threshold is unrealistic it gives the UK an out, an option to not feel trapped by the backstop. The more reasonable the criteria, the more votes it gets.
If the government is confident that another solution exists, I don't see why it's so much of a problem. From the EU's point of view, it's impossible to agree to a time threshold which would put us in the same situation as now, just X years in the future. There needs to be a meaningful specification.
This is then takenback to parliament and the vote goes better than last time. Even if the threshold is unrealistic it gives the UK an out, an option to not feel trapped by the backstop. The more reasonable the criteria, the more votes it gets.
If the government is confident that another solution exists, I don't see why it's so much of a problem. From the EU's point of view, it's impossible to agree to a time threshold which would put us in the same situation as now, just X years in the future. There needs to be a meaningful specification.
Wasn't that already the case though? Just that both sides had to agree that the new solution was acceptable, which seems unavoidable anyway.
Only 50 more sleeps until Brexit
No! Sleep! Till! Brexit!
I do understand your point.
However, had due diligence and proper planning been carried out as would have been done by a big organisation then, despite the decision, we would have gone through the leaving process with a clear plan for each eventuality.
Ha! Nice Beastie Boys reference!
If no deal happens, can’t the government put the unpaid divorce settlement into a pot, to pay for tariffs?
Also, any tariffs that are collected from businesses exporting to us, could be used to balance the UKs exports.
It’s a 2-way street.
We import more than we export, and a lot of the EU don’t want to lose that income.
Then lots of things are possible, but since no one knows exactly how it will all pan out, fear stalks the land. Brexit is a massive throw of the dice in economic terms, as in fact was joining the common market; however since it would seem the majority of people who voted leave didn't vote on economic grounds, the Remain argument falls on deaf ears. Its become an 'apple and oranges' argument that's why there is no coming together, one side or the other has to lose.
If the UK leaves without a deal the future is undetermined at this point, how we would fare trading as a separate entity cannot be assured; however staying in the EU means staying in a political organisation which is going in a direction the UK does not ultimately want to go, towards greater integration. Being outside the Euro-zone, wanting opt outs and rebates, not in favour of an EU army etc. makes the UK the 'awkward kid in the EU class' always out of step and dreading the emergence of majority voting on major issues, which is sure to come in the future EU... so why not leave?
Because its what we know, what we have settled for, leaving takes us out of our comfort zone and adds risk to an already uncertain future and its why in the end May or her successor will call off Brexit and we will all have to live with the consequences for the next decade.
There is no divorce settlement, the Uk just have to pay the amount they owe at the time they leave.
The tariffs are paid by the importers (not the exporters) who then pass it on to the consumers, like you.
Darkness falls across the land,
The midnight hour is close at hand,
Creatures crawl in search of food
To terrorize y'alls neighbourhood...
Sabotage could be apt too!
Of course it's none of this is guaranteed, but these documents should strike absolute terror into anyone in the UK.
Negotiating from a feeble position, faced with these kind of demands - a recipe for disaster.