O/T DDay for Brexit..well sort of...

[ragingpup]

Kerr your just spouting the same bag of bollox over and over again but you are actually saying nothing mate as the outcome still remains to be that a full and proper deal will not be decided until after we give the EU what they want!!!!!!! And even after that it still comes down to what the EU are willing to give us.

If we go ahead and sign this deal then not only are the Gov going against the leave vote they are actually burying us deeper into EU control! How come you cannot see that? May is playing a deadly game wanting this deal to pass, why do you think so many of her cabinet have walked away from it!

What we need is a strong leader to go in there and forge a deal that is good for this country. Why should we care what the EU want? We are leaving the EU or at least supposed to be so who gives a flying **** what is good for them. And if you really believe that no EU country will trade with us after we leave with a no deal Brexit you really do need your head feeling mate. Plenty of countries will follow us after we make the break but it has to be a clean break not a whimpering submissive one like May is trying to force through. The EU is clinging to the hope that they can hang on to us until after the next GE in the hope that whoever wins might change their mind and stay in. May is playing right into their hands and she either cant see it or she is hoping for the same thing herself.

Lets take the bull by the horns and **** them off completely and leave without a glance back.

Some stats that seem to contradict the stance that the EU need us more than we need them:

UK exports to the EU27: 14% as a share of UK GDP

EU27 exports to the UK: 3.2% as a share of EU27 GDP


While these figures already make abundantly clear who needs whom more than vice versa, it gets worse:

The amount of service exports as a share of the total exports is 39% for the UK and 25% only for the EU.

The backstop doesn't cover Freedom of Services. No one ever gets Freedom of Services without Freedom of Movement from the EU.
That would be 5.5% of UK GDP gone.

[rolymiller]

Bottom line with them is I'm afraid that whilst they speak of social concern with their fear of a Labour inspired economic crash, the real concern is that they own quite a few divvies...

...and there the nail is hit firmly on the head! Of course Kerr and GM don't want Labour in because they will have to cut back on an extravagance or two. They wouldn't be on the bread line though like many...What they don't really appreciate is many folks don't have any extravagances at all... do they care about that? Not one jot or it would reflect in their posts on here. I wouldn't mind if they had a sense of shame. How they sleep at night is beyond me...

[gm_gm]

...and there the nail is hit firmly on the head! Of course Kerr and GM don't want Labour in because they will have to cut back on an extravagance or two. They wouldn't be on the bread line though like many...What they don't really appreciate is many folks don't have any extravagances at all... do they care about that? Not one jot or it would reflect in their posts on here. I wouldn't mind if they had a sense of shame. How they sleep at night is beyond me...

Its a strange assertion to make Roly! its absurd to think that someones political beliefs mean they dont have any genuine concerns about poverty or other social issues.

Disappointing you think this way

[rolymiller]

The thing is Gm people who do genuinely care about poverty would surely back policies which tried to do summat about it. I'm not poverty struck myself but i am happy to have a bit less to help people worse off than myself thats why I prefer labour out of the parliamentary parties. I don't pretend they are perfect but they will fight more for the poor than the tories. The stuff about Corbyn being some sort of baby eating Stalinist inferred by the likes of Kerr is ridiculous to the extreme.

To be fair to you , I respect the fact that at least you nail your colours to the mast which is more than Kerr does for some inexplicable reason.

[ragingpup]

The thing is Gm people who do genuinely care about poverty would surely back policies which tried to do summat about it. I'm not poverty struck myself but i am happy to have a bit less to help people worse off than myself thats why I prefer labour out of the parliamentary parties. I don't pretend they are perfect but they will fight more for the poor than the tories. The stuff about Corbyn being some sort of baby eating Stalinist inferred by the likes of Kerr is ridiculous to the extreme.

To be fair to you , I respect the fact that at least you nail your colours to the mast which is more than Kerr does for some inexplicable reason.

In fairness Roly, it's not that the business motivating arguments that they put forward don't have any basis. I can understand the trickle down argument could, in theory, benefit everyone - if there was evidence of it actually working. Unfortunately, the evidence for supporting this argument after not only 8 years of this government, and also 40+ years of free market neo-lberalism from both parties produces no evidence that wealth trickles down to the lower ends of society, and the evidence that we can see and feel around us as we walk down our high streets, attend social centres and services, talk to headteachers, book medical appointments leads us to feel the opposite is the case.

I understand their cases when they make their arguments, but the relentless energy put into their persistent attacking of only one party/leader and in Kerr's case, inability to justify why he only attacks one party whilst claiming to be too sophisticated to vote for either side does make one a rodent smell... But there you go.

[rolymiller]

Yep, if the old trickle down argument had any evidence to support it, I would accept that their is some merit in in capitalism and monetary policies but as you say this never happens. This is something kerr never has an answer about just some sort of vague notion that if the rich make money we will all benefit from it. He gives no evidence to suggest that wealth created is actually distributed/shared out.

The problem is the word "greed". It means nothing to the likes of Kerr. He probably just applies it to a kid who has an extra helping of chips on their plate.He doesn't accept that some people's only motivation in life is £££££s whilst criticising those who are altruistically motivated.

[BigLadonOS]

worth a read. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8036802.stm

[animallittle3]

Spain now pulling a sad face at the UK government over Gibraltar .

The PM can jump on as many planes to and from Brussels as she wants but to get this deal through parliament looks unlikely , to say the least .


https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ar-brexit-deal

[KerrAvon]

Some stats that seem to contradict the stance that the EU need us more than we need them:

UK exports to the EU27: 14% as a share of UK GDP

EU27 exports to the UK: 3.2% as a share of EU27 GDP


While these figures already make abundantly clear who needs whom more than vice versa, it gets worse:

The amount of service exports as a share of the total exports is 39% for the UK and 25% only for the EU.

The backstop doesn't cover Freedom of Services. No one ever gets Freedom of Services without Freedom of Movement from the EU.
That would be 5.5% of UK GDP gone.

Not every service company will move out of the UK. We have expertise in financial services and insurance that other countries lack and we are English speaking, which makes us a good place for American companies to operate from. We also have a commercial legal system that is the jurisdiction of choice for many business deals and contracts.

You are right that Brexit and the extra costs that might go with it will act as a disincentive to companies to operate, create jobs and pay tax here, however, which is valid cause for concern. It’s strange that you can’t recognise that increasing corporate tax rates will do the same though.

[KerrAvon]

I voted remain but I think it was mainly out of fear of what the likes of Mogg, Davis et al on the further right of your party would do to employment and environmental rights and standards if free of the EU.

My ideal situation would be a leave on soft brexit Norway-ish terms with the EU, protecting the single market and cu as far as possible to protect the economy but with a labour government under the direction of the last manifesto so that we can improve our rights and protections further than possible under eu legislation. Obviously the ability to negotiate these under our own laws would depend hugely on what compromise we could reach if that ever became a possibility. But that's the ideal!

Next option would be to Remain so we retain eu protections on rights and environments from the nut jobs on the exteme of your party. This would restrict their ability to further erode workers/social/environmental rights as they would so like if they really overthrow May and get their No Deal.

Final option is the May deal but hope that Big Lad's paranoia turns out true and tat the evil eu keep us locked in the customs union and single market until we're all dead.

So, no, I'm not remain, no. Bit more complicated than that.

So what you are saying is that you fear that a government might come to power in the UK that would undermine environmental and employment protections in the UK. Ok, I can see that and agree with it. That has to be that risk in any democracy.

What I don’t get is how you see that a Norwegian style deal would meet your concerns. If an ‘extreme’ Tory government came to power in the UK, the odds are that they would be chucked out after five years (and, if they weren’t, it would suggest that they were getting something that a lot of people thought was right). A Norwegian style deal, on the other hand, means surrendering vast amounts of sovereignty to a pretty undemocratic EU, with no prospect of influencing the regulations we are required to observe. And if an ‘extreme’ regime took hold at the EU, then you would be stuck with it. Looking at the current EU leadership, you have to bear in mind that Jean-Claude Juncker presided over Luxembourg being turned into the tax avoidance capital of Europe. He probably wouldn't be on the guest list at a Momentum Christmas Party, but you are happy for him to be at the helm of this country apparently...

As for being able to ‘improve our rights and protections further than possible under EU legislation’, I fear that you are, once again demonstrating a lack of understanding. On this occasion it is in respect of Single Markets and the regulation required to underpin them. Regulation within a Single Market is aimed at preventing one member gaining a competitive advantage by having a lower regulatory regime, not a higher one. You could increase regulations and burdens on business to your heart’s content whilst a member of the EU – you would be stopped if your tried to go below the regulatory standard. Where Labour would come a cropper is in respect of state aid (you will recall the vast amounts of money pumped into lame duck industries in the 70s) and nationalisations.