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

[WanChaiMiller]

For what purpose do you "use the quote" then?
Do you agree or disagree that EU steel is doing well as quoted?

Why should I explain it to you? If you want to find out read through the posts that were exchanged.

[WanChaiMiller]

Do you agree or disagree that EU steel is doing well as quoted?

Difficult to know from the outside without seeing any of the individual company reports and accounts. We generally go on what is reported. By this a mean a journalist tales an opinion reports it and we go by it. In this situation Big Lad quoted what is thought to be an authoritative FT report. I have no way of varifying one way or another.

What do you think?

[Exiletyke]

Why should I explain it to you? If you want to find out read through the posts that were exchanged.

I have & that's why I asked you to clarify your position
So why indeed should you explain You are under no obligation to do so just so long as you apply the same logic when you ask questions like "what do you think"

[BigLadonOS]

Maybe this will put a lot of people right about how the EU referendum was sold to the UK people once and for all.

Argue with this remoaners.

[BigLadonOS]

Not sure how this supports your argument for us to leave the EU to trade under wto regs. EU steel is doing well in part due to tariffs on China imports. EU protectionism mean there will almost certainly be duty on our exports into the EU. We will find ourselves in the global market up against China with one hand tied behind our back.

Because the steel industry in the UK as a whole is NOT run by the UK. Tata steel is in fact an Indian company and trades to the EU via WTO rules. The article states that the Steel industry in the EU is growing because they are amalgamating steel companies under one banner and in doing so will stop imports altogether. This effectively kills off Tata steel as a trading partner inside the EU. In other words the EU has stuck 2 fingers up to the British people who work for Tata steel. Hardly a fair shake of the stick to us is it? Again the EU are killing this country slowly but surely and doing it in our own back yard.

Wake up to the fact that the EU wants everything run for the benefit of only the selected few it feels are worthy and we are not on that list.

Go and do some research on British companies that have gone to the wall only to be replaced by EU run businesses from the big hitters inside the EU I am sure you will then be as mad at the EU as I am for killing this countries once great standing throughout the world.

[ragingpup]

Maybe this will put a lot of people right about how the EU referendum was sold to the UK people once and for all.

Argue with this remoaners.

What Cameron is saying makes sense:

1. Renegotiate a deal with the EU that we think better serves the UK
2. Then vote by a referendum if we want to be in that deal with the EU or come out on No Deal terms.

Can you not see where this went wrong? And why it doesn't apply to what actually happened?

[BigLadonOS]

What Cameron is saying makes sense:

1. Renegotiate a deal with the EU that we think better serves the UK
2. Then vote by a referendum if we want to be in that deal with the EU or come out on No Deal terms.

Can you not see where this went wrong? And why it doesn't apply to what actually happened?

If it makes sense why are we not out of the EU yet. We voted out in the referendum which Cameron said was a mandate by the British people to the government.

He went and made the deal, it was not what the public wanted so we voted out. How can you argue with that?

[ragingpup]

If it makes sense why are we not out of the EU yet. We voted out in the referendum which Cameron said was a mandate by the British people to the government.

He went and made the deal, it was not what the public wanted so we voted out. How can you argue with that?

Simple. Because we did not have the opportunity as a public to vote whether to leave on the terms of the negotiated deal. This would have made perfect sense and avoided the **** were in. Why we deviated from this simple idea I do not know.

[BigLadonOS]

Simple. Because we did not have the opportunity as a public to vote whether to leave on the terms of the negotiated deal. This would have made perfect sense and avoided the **** were in. Why we deviated from this simple idea I do not know.

Are you for real??? Cameron made it quite simple and told anyone who would listen that he did not get the deal he went for and that our membership was going to stay virtually as it was with very little change. How come you missed this information that was widely reported across all news networks at the time.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politi...endum-35622105

[ragingpup]

Are you for real??? Cameron made it quite simple and told anyone who would listen that he did not get the deal he went for and that our membership was going to stay virtually as it was with very little change. How come you missed this information that was widely reported across all news networks at the time.

OK, I see what you're saying. But Cameron's 'renegotiation' with the EU such as it was bears no relationship to what most of us understand is the trade deal that we would have to negotiate avoid a No Deal Brexit. Whatever Cameron said, before 2015 General Election, the Leave argument was heavily weighted (as their front page of their manifesto said) by it's attachment to a deal and countless pro-Leave politicians saying that a Deal would be possible and even easy. I think WanChai linked to the Leave doc that said this.

Just a thought - it would help if you can find evidence that the General Election manifesto in 2015 made reference to leaving with No Deal in an 'In Out' referendum and then aiming for renegotiation, to solidify Cameron's words here? That would strengthen your case. Or any other Leave docs from the referendum campaign that clearly stated that the intention was to Leave on WTO terms and then re-negotiate? Did these words make it into the either manifesto? No time to check here, got daughter homework to do!