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

[great_fire]

Very GF. Put forward an argument in all confidence. Get it blown out of the water and then resort to abstract paranoid speculation. You've been learning from the Master!

Sorry I must have missed that, I didn't think the left had any arguments, just "feelings".

[ragingpup]

I’m not being ‘deliberately slanted’ at all. I’m telling you what I think without any filters being imposed upon me by allegiance to a particular political party or doctrine. I appreciate that is something that you find difficult to understand.

Lol - by far and away the biggest comedy statement on the thread! How is your stance different to the Conservative Party? Please be clear as I don't see a difference. (Blimey Kerr, you don't half leave yourself wide open to stumping don't you?!

In fact, come to think of it, you still haven't told me how your own views on any topic differ from any Conservative Party policy.

And we all know why don't we Boys and Girls??!

[gm_gm]

Absolutely untrue. We would have left the EU. Just not in the way that it appears you and others on here would like. Which is fair enough. But to say we would still be in the EU is simply not true. We voted to Leave. With these plans, we would Leave.

Wrong,

[ragingpup]

I’m not being ‘deliberately slanted’ at all. I’m telling you what I think without any filters being imposed upon me by allegiance to a particular political party or doctrine. I appreciate that is something that you find difficult to understand.

I find it extraordinary that you or anyone else would willingly give an external body the right to impose laws upon the UK without us having any say in the matter, particularly when that external body will be a direct competitor to the UK as a place to do business and create jobs. I can only assume that you believe that the EU is and will remain a body that is capable of only acting in a benign fashion towards the UK, even if it would be in the best interests of its member states not to do so?

As an example, in 2011, the EU proposed a whole raft of regulation for the banking and finance industry that the UK government saw as threat to what is one of the largest and most successful sectors of the British economy. As we were members of the EU, we were able to veto that. In the quasi-membership that Corbyn proposes, we would not have been able to.

Let me put it another way; if it was announced that there would be no more elections in this country and that, instead, a body would be appointed to write laws over which you would have no say and that the body in question might have other country’s interests at heart, would you think that a good idea? In answering, put out of your mind whether Corbyn would think it a good idea as that shouldn’t be a relevant consideration.

As for where I think we should go next, I told you last night. For my part, I fear a no deal Brexit and think it would be very damaging in the short to medium term. I think it preferable to the surrender of democracy and zombie membership on offer from Labour, however.

It is indeed a slanted argument, as you are not factoring in that such a future relationship would be up for negotiation, as I clearly said. You are simply assuming that in return for allowing tariff free trade and transport (from which both the EU and the UK would enormously benefit (hence Tusk welcoming the idea) that we would have to take all of the Laws without a say. If that were the case, I would agree with you. But you are simply presuming a likely outcome. Why didn't you presume such a negative negotiating outcome when May went into her negotiations, and that was on the basis that the EU instinctively disliked?

And didn't you argue on here that you thought that May got a good deal from the EU, that the EU gave surprising concessions that we should bite their hand off?

You did say that didn't you?

So why wouldn't the EU surprise us again and give similarly generous concessions for a Deal that they would more naturally favour, and therefore be inclined to give us better concessions?

(I'm inclined to think that you've been in Wetherspoons again, as just like last Friday, you're logically all over the ropes. Still, good value meal deals eh? And you can cosy up to old Tim who it appears shares your views... Good hard thinkers together...

[ragingpup]

Wrong,

Are you arguing that we would still be a formal member of the EU?

[ragingpup]

Sorry I must have missed that, I didn't think the left had any arguments, just "feelings".

It is true that Infowars puts forward such a proposition. Open mouth, gulp...

[gm_gm]

Are you arguing that we would still be a formal member of the EU?

I’m saying I know a lot more than you.

[KerrAvon]

It is indeed a slanted argument, as you are not factoring in that such a future relationship would be up for negotiation, as I clearly said. You are simply assuming that in return for allowing tariff free trade and transport (from which both the EU and the UK would enormously benefit (hence Tusk welcoming the idea) that we would have to take all of the Laws without a say. If that were the case, I would agree with you. But you are simply presuming a likely outcome. Why didn't you presume such a negative negotiating outcome when May went into her negotiations, and that was on the basis that the EU instinctively disliked?

I’m assuming nothing. I simply have an understanding of a customs union that extends beyond ‘Jeremy says it’s a good idea’.

No trading bloc is going to agree to a customs union without being able to impose ‘level playing field’ laws. In other words, they need to be able to stop any attempt to gain a competitive advantage in its tracks. Unless you believe that the EU is always going to act in a benign fashion towards the UK, the power to impose such laws can also be used to obtain a competitive advantage. Frankfurt and Paris would love a bit of the financial services and legal work that goes on in London.

And didn't you argue on here that you thought that May got a good deal from the EU, that the EU gave surprising concessions that we should bite their hand off?

You did say that didn't you?

So why wouldn't the EU surprise us again and give similarly generous concessions for a Deal that they would more naturally favour, and therefore be inclined to give us better concessions?

(I'm inclined to think that you've been in Wetherspoons again, as just like last Friday, you're logically all over the ropes. Still, good value meal deals eh? And you can cosy up to old Tim who it appears shares your views... Good hard thinkers together...

I argued that May got a surprisingly good deal from the EU, but one that was flawed by the backstop, which would cause it to be rejected. If you can find a post in which I said we should bite the EU’s hand off then go ahead and post it. Tic toc as they say on here.

I don’t drink in Wetherspoons by choice as the beer is generally rubbish. I do think the Wetherspoons app is impressive though – being able to order from the table rather than queuing at the bar. I do hope you aren't going to lose your sh1t again and go off on another rant. The signs are all there.

[ragingpup]

I’m saying I know a lot more than you.

In which case, a Yes or a No should come easily...

[ragingpup]

I’m assuming nothing. I simply have an understanding of a customs union that extends beyond ‘Jeremy says it’s a good idea’.

No trading bloc is going to agree to a customs union without being able to impose ‘level playing field’ laws. In other words, they need to be able to stop any attempt to gain a competitive advantage in its tracks. Unless you believe that the EU is always going to act in a benign fashion towards the UK, the power to impose such laws can also be used to obtain a competitive advantage. Frankfurt and Paris would love a bit of the financial services and legal work that goes on in London.


I argued that May got a surprisingly good deal from the EU, but one that was flawed by the backstop, which would cause it to be rejected. If you can find a post in which I said we should bite the EU’s hand off then go ahead and post it. Tic toc as they say on here.

I don’t drink in Wetherspoons by choice as the beer is generally rubbish. I do think the Wetherspoons app is impressive though – being able to order from the table rather than queuing at the bar. I do hope you aren't going to lose your sh1t again and go off on another rant. The signs are all there.

So, to summarise. Your present position is to support a Leave with No Deal? Yes?

You have agreed that this would be economically painful and cause a lot of job losses? Yes?

What is there to lose from May and Corbyn getting together and negotiating a plan that is based around the idea of a Customs Union, work out together what we are willing to accept and what our bottom lines are (which I would agree should include us having a say in formation of future trade laws), getting the more moderate majority of their parties to agree to their proposal and then between then, take their proposal to the EU to negotiate.

What do we have to lose from that approach?


Completely disagree that Wetherspoons do rubbish beers. They do a mean Punk House IPA for a mere £3.50. Bargain.