Thankfully. The rather obvious narrative, that I'm sure we'll hear, will be that they only did so because we're all stroppy and threatening to leave and if we stay in we shall find ourselves without that advantage.
EU Referendum | UK residents vote today.
- Thread starter 711
- Start date
- Status
I doubt that it will come to that. International trade is a tricky thing though. You would think that a country like Australia, who aren't in any multinational superclub, would be able to impose whatever restrictions they like in their own country. Not so:
They thankfully managed to get their way eventually too, but it just goes to show how difficult international law can be. I haven't got a clue why any company or organisation would want to impose VAT on sanitary products, but its a complex world we live in.
Are the EFTA countries subject to the EU minimum VAT rate? (The 5% we were forced to add onto these "luxury" items until now). From 5 minutes of googling, it appears that they aren't.
The obvious is quite often true.
If something starts free before you join it stays free, once something has VAT imposed it tends to stay that way under EU rules.
There would be equally difficult laws imposed if Brexit wins as we go begging (negotiate) for open access to the EU and NAFTA, we won't have control of our own destiny. Look how much work is going into the E -US trade deal, all the warnings about having to privatise the NHS. Do you think the Americans would make any deal where they don't get access to one of the biggest areas of spending in this country?
I should certainly hope so. Like you say, when something starts free, it tends to to stay free. And maybe if something starts fenced off, it tends to stay fenced off.
I'm a bit confused about the NHS privatization thing in general. Not sure where it lands between hyperbole and something to genuinely worry about.
This is the only poll I have seen with Remain/Stay winning, i'm hoping its not an accurate representation of the general population. Come on where are you Brexiters hiding.
I can't understand why people think we will have difficulty trading and I don't see that we'll be begging anyone.
For example, the UK takes 10% of Spain's oranges at the moment. Spain already has a surplus of oranges so it needs us to carry on taking our 10% or they're going to be having to try and find another market. It's the same with lemons. We are one of their 5 largest trading partners so we are a market they can't afford to lose. They'll virtually be begging us to carry on trading with them. European countries will be dependent on our trade, just as we will be dependent on some of their trade and it won't be in anyone's interest to be difficult with us.
Don't worry. Didn't this forum have the majority of people voting Labour in the General Election and look what happened there.
It's an interesting question. Bookies odds still about 4/11 on for Stay, which is quite strong.
Money to be made for those willing to back the opposite?
Yep might be worth a punt, all the polls I have seen on other websites and all over twitter etc have "leave" winning by quite a distance. The bookies must know something we don't; Probably that the vote will be fixed to "remain" if if Brexit wins by a landslide lol
Most recent poll of polls has leave 49, remain 51. Not sure what polls you've seen.
Bookmakers themselves don't care who wins a particular event, their aim is to adjust their odds according to the weight of money placed, so that they make a profit whatever the result. When you place a bet you are effectively opposing other gamblers, not the bookies.
Last edited:
Probably those polls adjusted for likely voters. It is currently closer than the Scottish referendum and leave voters are more likely to go out and vote.
Not sure where the poll of polls get their information from. The Telegraph had an online poll with over 260 thousand votes with Leave winning by over 70%. The daily mirror had a poll with leave also winning at around 70% of the votes. I see numerous different polls on twitter or different websites and leave is always ahead, other than the few so called poll of poll sites that have them at around 50/50. I know these polls cant be an accurate judgement of how everyone will vote at the moment but from what ive seen most if not all of the polls have leave winning. If you can show me a poll with remain winning by any considerable distance I would be surprised, other than the one on this forum of course.
Last edited:
The Daily Mail voted 95% Leave, with the other 5% writing on Option C : Bring back hanging.
http://news.sky.com/story/1664731/ukip-uses-brussels-attacks-to-make-brexit-case
Didn't take long. Scum.
Didn't take long. Scum.
Vermin the lot of them.
Quite true.
"Sky uses Farage's response to Brussels attack to make case against UKIP" as one of the comments on the story said. Which would be a more apt title for that article.
Maybe people shouldn't be so quick to come out and say things soon after such atrocities but given the situation at the moment with immigration and the upcoming EU referendum do you expect them to just say nothing? Did you even read Nigel Farages twitter post? It said: "I'm very upset by events in Brussels today and even more depressed for the future." Oh what a disgusting man to say such a thing
."Sky uses Farage's response to Brussels attack to make case against UKIP" as one of the comments on the story said. Which would be a more apt title for that article.
Maybe people shouldn't be so quick to come out and say things soon after such atrocities but given the situation at the moment with immigration and the upcoming EU referendum do you expect them to just say nothing? Did you even read Nigel Farages twitter post? It said: "I'm very upset by events in Brussels today and even more depressed for the future." Oh what a disgusting man to say such a thing
Mike Hookem's tweet was the worst. Totally making political points out of the death of innocents.
Yes I guess that is a little over the mark. Its more making political points out of the actions of the terrorists rather than the death of innocents which were a result of the terrorist attack. But anyway im nit picking. Maybe he should of chosen to keep quiet or say something else at this time over such a delicate subject. Political correctness has gone mad though, know one can say anything these days.
'Vermin and scum' for making legitimate political points? What the feck is wrong with you?
Part of the Brexit campaign is focussed on security. It would be madness for them not to respond to today's events. You two need to get some perspective.
This
Perhaps you would have preferred it if he had referred his tweet to the Ministry of Truth before posting it? Maybe it could have been delayed to a more appropriate time, or 'corrected' even.
After all, we can't have citizens sharing their feelings if they contradict the prevailing narrative.
Called it, as did anyone who gave it a seconds thought.
An attack on UK soil could push the poll over the edge.
Don't post it today. If you say anything say your thoughts are with the people of Belgium. There are times for decency sake when you don't make a political point.
Nonsense.
This isn't some petty political issue. This is a matter of urgency and one with very serious implications. If the Brexit campaign considers it important to stress their points at this time, then they are entitled to do so. If David Cameron had made the point today that the EU borders are secure and that we are safer in the EU, would you be referring to him as scum and vermin also? If not then it seems that your judgement is not based on the crassness of 'point scoring' but on the opinion itself.
Yes. but he didn't. I don't like him as a person but I respect the fact that he said he wouldn't been drawn into politics over the event. That was the thing to do. That was how a diplomat that represents our country should react to this type of event.
There was a Telegraph journalist posting about how this supports Brexit less than an hour after the reported explosions at the airport. In my view, it's insensitive. People are dying, no number have been confirmed, yet the first thing you post is this.
Found the tweet.
Breaking news from the BBC
07:20 GMT
Reaction.
07:45 GMT.
I'm sorry, but the way I see it, it's inappropriate and badly timed.
I have to agree.
To be fair, when there's a mass shooting in America for example, people are straight away making points about guns. People don't seem to have an issue with it then (except the gun nuts)
It wasn't all that long ago that the suggestion that large parts of European cities had become dangerous hotbeds of jihadism would have been rejected as rightwing nonsense by an establishment that we now know deliberately tried to suppress the truth. You can't blame people for wanting to repeat this long-held view now that it is undeniably true to all.
Exactly. It's one of the biggest double standards of modern identity politics.
He didn't because he can't. Of course he wont be drawn into politics over the event when there is nothing he could say that would possibly benefit his agenda. Thats the main reason he isn't saying anything, rather than him being diplomatic.
Meanwhile, in other news http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/g...-rescued-car-crash-syrian-refugees-1337161772
Well the idea that all Jihadist come from mainland Europe and not the UK is nonsense(remember Jihadi John). He could say that. The idea that a British based Jihadist would need to cross boarders from Europe to cause a threat to our way of life is totally wrong. He could have used that. We are stronger together. He could say that.
There are lost of ways to refute the idea that being out of Europe would make us safer.
Sounds like the plot of a feelgood movie where kindly foreigners win over the big ol' racist.
A couple of hours after the attack and immediately it's statements like "open borders lead to attacks, britain will be next" etc etc. It's almost like they can't wait for something like this to happen.
Last edited:
The thing is they know that we are not part of the open border agreement. They have just used this to scare monger.
- Status