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

[Exiletyke]

That's an extreme case of Whataboutery but not wishing to spoil your enjoyment perhaps you could do a little more research as to your often lengthy posts compared to my posts which generally observe brevity by comparison

A cursory look at the length of your posts well in excess of 3-400 words compared to mine of 3-4 dozen speaks for itself as the time spent on your posts is a function of the number of words used & on that basis you spend far more time than I do

[Shark27]

I'll be honest, I voted to leave. I expected the vote to be remain but if remain would have won I would have lived the rest of my life knowing that we had the chance to leave and my countrymen (and women) wanted to stay in the EU. I would have respected that. I voted to leave thinking there would be some hardship but for the future of my country it would be a good thing. If I lost my job in the short term, so be it!!

Someone on question time (A remainer) was complaining that British manufacturing has been In decline for 40 years. Makes me wonder if there are any coincedences in that timescale??????

Why do we look at countries like Japan as some kind of powerhouse?

There are a lot of businessmen in their big factories telling us how leaving the EU is a disaster. Is that because their profits are going to drop from 20 million to 15 million, or maybe even 5 million? I can see why some of the Labour voting remainders want that, or maybe not????

[Grist_To_The_Mill]

Whatever fudged package they come up with if the deal includes accepting free movement of EU nationals then there’s going to be big trouble to follow.

[gm_gm]

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.

How can May negotiate a plan with? They are junktaposed, Corbyn wants to leave but has his strings pulled Starma who wants to stay and has invented his impossible test (which to pass them we have to remain) May wants to stay but is have her strings pulled by those who wants to leave.

All JC wants is an election which he would lose by a landslide ......we appear to be in the Shyte up to our necks without a plausible solution

[ragingpup]

How can May negotiate a plan with? They are junktaposed, Corbyn wants to leave but has his strings pulled Starma who wants to stay and has invented his impossible test (which to pass them we have to remain) May wants to stay but is have her strings pulled by those who wants to leave.

All JC wants is an election which he would lose by a landslide ......we appear to be in the Shyte up to our necks without a plausible solution

I think you're a bit behind the news. Labour's letter to May has dropped the 'exact same benefits of the SM', have put forward their outlines for what they would like and have asked to meet May to negotiate. The whole point (and the leadership have seriously pissed off a large number of their members who are rabidly pushing for a 2nd vote) is that we need to find a way to break the deadlock - we recognise that May's plan is not going to work, and that No Deal (unless MPs unanimously vote to legislate to take it off the table) is where we are heading. So with that in mind, Labour have compromised their '6 tests' and are willing to negotiate with May on a joint plan to agree a deal that can get a majority from moderates in both parties to avoid the impending No Deal.

This will involve compromise from May and Corbyn to agree on something that they can take to the EU, their own bottom lines on what we will accept/not accept in compromise, in turn, from the EU.

It's either that or No Deal. I appreciate that many on here are willing to take that risk and accept the hit, but surely negotiation between the 2 parties, some compromise from everyone, is worth exploring before we go down that route? Isn't it?

As I said, what is there to lose from trying this?

[ragingpup]

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?

So Kerr. No response, so I will summarise your position. Correct me if it is wrong.

You are not willing to see a compromise between May and Corbyn? You are not willing to explore, in order to avoid a No Deal, a compromise Softer Brexit which we could negotiate with the EU a different style of agreement, and to find out what bottom lines that such a negotiation could provide for us?

You would rather go straight to a No Deal? On the principle that the EU are now a competitor who will not allow us a say in future trade agreements, even though they stand to gain from tariff free trade from us as one of their biggest partners?

You are not willing to explore the compromise?

On this point of principle?

And as a result of this principle, you accept that there will be a substantial impact on business, that will cause many businesses to relocate to the EU and lose us a large number of jobs and revenues?

Yet, when a suggestion is put that a small increase in corporation tax on businesses, you argue incessantly about this being an extreme, lunatic, and dogmatic position.


Can you see the contradiction?


Game, set and match.

[ragingpup]

Whatever fudged package they come up with if the deal includes accepting free movement of EU nationals then there’s going to be big trouble to follow.

Whereas all this looks a breeze: https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ring-civilians

[animallittle3]

How can May negotiate a plan with? They are junktaposed, Corbyn wants to leave but has his strings pulled Starma who wants to stay and has invented his impossible test (which to pass them we have to remain) May wants to stay but is have her strings pulled by those who wants to leave.

All JC wants is an election which he would lose by a landslide ......we appear to be in the Shyte up to our necks without a plausible solution

The days of Tory landslides are long gone gm , not saying Labour would win with a majority either but neither would the Conservatives .

[KerrAvon]

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.

No, I don't support no deal.. My current position is not that I want no deal. My position is as set out on Thursday evening.

If the EU persist in not giving ground on the backstop, a no deal appears inevitable given that the ERG, DUP and Labour are united in their opposition to the only deal on the table. Of course a no deal exit will be economically painful.

So Corbyn is now proposing a compromise? Let's take a look at that:

The May deal was voted down because of the backstop and the fear that it could leave the UK indefinitely locked into a customs union in which we would be forced to accept EU legislation over which we had no control, be subject to the jurisdiction of the ECJ and not be able to make trade deals other than through the EU.

Corbyn's solution is for us to be indefinitely locked into a customs union in which we would be forced to accept EU legislation over which we would have no control, be subject to the jurisdiction of the ECJ and not be able to make trade deals other than through the EU.

Lol

It's not for me to decide whether May gets together with Corbyn to discuss his 'compromise'. I can think of three reasons why she probably won't though:

1, Corbyn's plan represents a crap outcome for the UK.
2. Accepting a customs union would put her in breach of the 2017 Tory manifesto.
3. Because it would be a crap outcome and place her in breach of her manifesto she wouldn't get a customs union deal through the Tory Party, let alone Parliament.

Having any luck in finding a post where I said that we should grab the May deal with both hands?

[KerrAvon]

So Kerr. No response, so I will summarise your position. Correct me if it is wrong.

You are not willing to see a compromise between May and Corbyn? You are not willing to explore, in order to avoid a No Deal, a compromise Softer Brexit which we could negotiate with the EU a different style of agreement, and to find out what bottom lines that such a negotiation could provide for us?

You would rather go straight to a No Deal? On the principle that the EU are now a competitor who will not allow us a say in future trade agreements, even though they stand to gain from tariff free trade from us as one of their biggest partners?

You are not willing to explore the compromise?

On this point of principle?

And as a result of this principle, you accept that there will be a substantial impact on business, that will cause many businesses to relocate to the EU and lose us a large number of jobs and revenues?

Yet, when a suggestion is put that a small increase in corporation tax on businesses, you argue incessantly about this being an extreme, lunatic, and dogmatic position.


Can you see the contradiction?


Game, set and match.

Lol. If you are as good at tennis as you are at political debate I can well understand why you would have to be the umpire as well as a player to win.

Your party voted for no deal when it joined with others to vote down the May deal and it's customs union backstop. Own that

I fear a no deal and the damage it would bring, but it is preferable to the damaging - half in half out - affront to democracy that a customs union solution represents.

I'm grateful for your tacit acknowledgement of the damaging nature of Labour's planned corporate tax rises. What you fail to note is the likely futility of them, with tax revenues either falling as companies quit the country or any increase being more than taken up by the need to make benefit payments to an increased number of the unemployed.