The EU: In, out, shake it all about....

As of right now, how are thinking of voting? In or out

  • Remain

    Votes: 23 37.1%
  • Leave

    Votes: 35 56.5%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 3 4.8%
  • Not registered or not intention to vote

    Votes: 1 1.6%

  • Total voters
    62
  • Poll closed .

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Dec 9, 2011
20,504
14,673
263
This is why there is no point panicking now...just like there wasn't 2yrs ago. Everything goes down to the wire with EU negotiations.

I disagree on "the end"...Bojo has been clear on that from the start...31st October. Of course that doesn't mean he will not ask for an extension, especially if significant progress is made.

As far as truthful goes, none of them are. The EU wouldn't entertain any change to WA initially, now look at them! A deal is in sight by the looks. The final deal will resemble the WA as first put quite closely, but even Juncker has wavered on the Backstop so it is a case (as always) of watch this space. And not believing everything (or better still anything) we are told in the media in anything but small measure.

Celebrating???

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Jesus wept
 

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2011
1,861
1,270
163
There is no 'weakening of hand', the respective reality of the positions of the UK and the EU are the same. This is not bargaining to buy some fake clobber in Turkey you cretin.
Bit unfair to call him a cretin. Many people believe that Johnson’s apparent seriousness to resolve the matter or else by 31 Oct has focussed EU minds, for example the WA, which was not up for renegotiation, can now be amended (if it delivers the same outcome/protections to the original backstop)

I find it pretty offensive when people dismiss the removal of No deal as irrelevant by arguing that it isn’t like buying a car, house or ‘fake clobber from turkey’ again, treating people who suggest this as idiots. Most people realise it’s different, however unless you’re involved in the negotiations, how on earth do you know how the EU react to positioning by the UK ? (you don’t !). I know a lot of people (remain and leave) who believe talking No deal off the table would be detrimental to our negotiating position, many of whom I trust the intelligence and judgement of over others that use the alternative argument.

Ps Let’s reverse the argument. Now the EU can pretty much dictate the terms of the extension due to a remain Parliament. If they say two years and labour refuses a vote of no confidence, what are we supposed to do ? In that time we have to continue to contribute the same amount into the EU pot (£15bn last year apparently as our growth is higher than most EU countries). We could therefore ultimately end up paying more than the agreed divorce bill ?! Also, the longer it drags on, the weaker our economic position due to the continued uncertainty and the more likely the public get weary and may accept staying in (after losing the war of attrition), again strengthening the EUs position.

So, if you look at it from the other perspective, in any negotiation you need to be willing and prepared to walk away, even if it means a potential negative impact (as the alternative might be even worse than that negative impact). Unfortunately, we haven’t properly prepared (due to people like Hammond and the noise from remainers saying it’s a waste of money....no it’s not, it’s common sense !)....that doesn’t mean we should rule out the option though.
 
Last edited:

Astute

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2011
30,776
7,515
263
Cumbria
Bit unfair to call him a cretin. Many people believe that Johnson’s apparent seriousness to resolve the matter or else by 31 Oct has focussed EU minds, for example the WA, which was not up for renegotiation, can now be amended (if it delivers the same outcome/protections to the original backstop)

I find it pretty offensive when people dismiss the removal of No deal as irrelevant by arguing that it isn’t like buying a car, house or ‘fake clobber from turkey’ again, treating people who suggest this as idiots. Most people realise it’s different, however unless you’re involved in the negotiations, how on earth do you know how the EU react to positioning by the UK ? (you don’t !). I know a lot of people (remain and leave) who believe talking No deal off the table would be detrimental to our negotiating position, many of whom I trust the intelligence and judgement of over others that use the alternative argument.

Ps Let’s reverse the argument. Now the EU can pretty much dictate the terms of the extension due to a remain Parliament. If they say two years and labour refuses a vote of no confidence, what are we supposed to do ? In that time we have to continue to contribute the same amount into the EU pot (£15bn last year apparently as our growth is higher than most EU countries). We could therefore ultimately end up paying more than the agreed divorce bill ?! Also, the longer it drags on, the weaker our economic position due to the continued uncertainty and the more likely the public get weary and may accept staying in (after losing the war of attrition), again strengthening the EUs position.

So, if you look at it from the other perspective, in any negotiation you need to be willing and prepared to walk away, even if it means a potential negative impact (as the alternative might be even worse than that negative impact). Unfortunately, we haven’t properly prepared (due to people like Hammond and the noise from remainers saying it’s a waste of money....no it’s not, it’s common sense !)....that doesn’t mean we should rule out the option though.
I agree with you 100%.

But many won't. All they want is to remain. And if they can't remain they want us to keep close ties. I also fully agree with this. But both sides want what is best for them.

You have the EU and countries in the EU. They have kept united. But even during them there has been moments when the worry has slipped into the public demain. But they have kept united. This has kept their hand strong.

Then you come to the UK.

A deal that would keep harmony and ties was dismissed by the vast majority three times. Those who wanted out saw it as being kept in. Those who wanted to remain saw it as a way of leaving. So no deal.

Time to stand together? Oh no. Lets have talks. But lets not keep our hand close to our chest. In fact how about giving up our bargaining power. Leaving without a deal isn't allowed. So that means they can offer anything which is well to their advantage as we have to accept it. The priblem is parliament won't let something through that puts us in a massively bad deal. We have tried this already.

The Irish problem was designed to be a problem. They could have got around a table knowing that if they didn't come to an agreement on trade there would be a problem with a border somewhere in/around Ireland. But we have wasted three years arguing about this border. And what this argument is all about is what happens if we don't come to a trade agreement.

Everyone should want a trade agreement. It is in the best interests of all. But where it falls down is what happens in the future. Can we make our own trade deals? If it ends up that we can't make our own trade deals and we still have to pay billions into the EU every year what are we leaving for?

So yes we need our strongest hand when having talks. It doesn't mean we have to go through with it. Just like the EU doesn't have to go through with their threats. Because when it comes ti it they won't want the massive job losses that would come with us leaving without a deal. They are ready with a disaster fund of half a billion to help countries through it all. Half a billion? That would soon be gone. They say about 25,000 jobs would be lost to German car makers alone. And this is the strongest economy in the EU.

It is time to drop the soundbites. Get around a bloody table and talk. Look at the priblems of not ciming to a trade agreement and talk trade. Come to an agreement on hiw much membership should cost us afterwards. And stop looking and acting like spoilt children and act like adults. Try and get the respect back from the public.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CCFCSteve

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2011
1,861
1,270
163
People also forget that the sequencing was the EUs call, this made the Irish border issue a far greater one than it would’ve been if trade talks had been run concurrently (as requested by Davis - for all his faults this was correct)

I’m not blaming the EU for taking this stance (I would’ve pushed for it if I was them) but many of the people complaining about the risks of No Deal etc never appear to have got the fact that the EU have tried to squeeze this position from day one....it’s in their interests to. I’ve said numerous times before, check previous negative EU referenda and tell me if any have ultimately succeeded. That tells its own story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astute

Astute

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2011
30,776
7,515
263
Cumbria
People also forget that the sequencing was the EUs call, this made the Irish border issue a far greater one than it would’ve been if trade talks had been run concurrently (as requested by Davis - for all his faults this was correct)

I’m not blaming the EU for taking this stance (I would’ve pushed for it if I was them) but many of the people complaining about the risks of No Deal etc never appear to have got the fact that the EU have tried to squeeze this position from day one....it’s in their interests to. I’ve said numerous times before, check previous negative EU referenda and tell me if any have ultimately succeeded. That tells its own story.
Exactly what I have said from the start. The EU has made it difficult from the start.

I don't have a problem with this. It is their prerogative. What I do have a problem with is the way we have come across in the UK.

But to have talks about how to not have a border in Ireland whilst talks take place instead of having talks when there is no border?

So what would happen long term if talks break down and there is a backstop? They would still have us by the balls. We would have gone through all this pain and it would continue as we wouldn't be allowed to leave. We would be a whisper in the background and have those in charge ordering us what to do. Not a good position to be in. This is why hardly anyone wanted the so called May deal. Not in and not out. Paying for a party but not being able to take part.

This is why I have always been against the backstop. It doesn't benefit us in any way.

What is needed is talks. Trade, the rights of those who have made lives elsewhere, our future relationships and more. A Switzeland deal? They got such a good deal that the EU said they would bever offer it to anyone again. Of course they would say that.

But what I want the most is the childish squabbling to end. This is all the way from the bottom to the top. Then we can get somewhere. I just wish it was someone better than BJ that tried to make things happen.
 

Sick Boy

Well-Known Member
Sep 29, 2008
15,677
7,431
263
Verona, Italy
If a deal happens if will be because the Tories and DUP will have made a U-turn on different regulations for NI and Great Britain. I expect it will be portrayed as a victory but it would have been far simpler if May hadn’t set her red lines.

The real problem is going to be division in the UK, which I don’t think will end any time soon.

There will be millions of people stripped of EU citizenship and their right to live, work or retire in another country who are not going to simply say “oh well”.

People tend to not like it when their rights are taken away.
 
Last edited:

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2012
18,340
5,092
213
Coventry
People also forget that the sequencing was the EUs call, this made the Irish border issue a far greater one than it would’ve been if trade talks had been run concurrently (as requested by Davis - for all his faults this was correct)

I’m not blaming the EU for taking this stance (I would’ve pushed for it if I was them) but many of the people complaining about the risks of No Deal etc never appear to have got the fact that the EU have tried to squeeze this position from day one....it’s in their interests to. I’ve said numerous times before, check previous negative EU referenda and tell me if any have ultimately succeeded. That tells its own story.
Ultimately Steve the EU got their act together and outwitted Team Twat in the negotiations. When No Deal looked possible earlier in the year they made preparations accordingly. It isn’t an ace in the hole if they’re OK with it happening and are ready for it.We have seen some absurd ideas to do with threatening the Irish coming from the more hardline on the right when really, all the EU wants is to know what the hell we’re doing.

The decision to flip off Europe was ours. We are the ones who have ballsed it up and characterised it by straw manning the EU position. Johnson, the biggest liar in Britain in both literal and metaphorical senses, is asking us to trust him. Yes the usual morons here have done so but the EU will not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sick Boy

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2012
8,171
1,264
113
Why do you put experts in inverted commas? The science on this can be understood by any teenager and it’s incredible that even now there are sceptics not least the Irritating Orange.
Who deems them to be 'expert'?

Me? You? People that like them? Friends in their chosen field?

Remember 'experts' once told people smoking was good for them? 'Experts' now say it isn't! Science behind agenda appears to be moveable.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2012
8,171
1,264
113
How does it rate as an idea compared to:

Offering pork pies to Trump for a trade deal

Comparing Muslims to letterboxes and burglars

Suspending Parliament for longer so nothing can get passed and telling porkies to the Queen in the process

Buying a massive water cannon

Building a bridge to France

Writing articles for and against the EU before making a political calculation

And many more
What are you on about?

It was your idea not Boris's!

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2012
18,340
5,092
213
Coventry
Who deems them to be 'expert'?

Me? You? People that like them? Friends in their chosen field?

Remember 'experts' once told people smoking was good for them? 'Experts' now say it isn't! Science behind agenda appears to be moveable.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Science validates itself through physical evidence and peer review. When new evidence comes along, ideas get refined or rejected. The medical evidence on smoking didn’t start to emerge until the last few decades once cancer was better understood.

As for climate change the basics are irrefutable

We burn fossil fuels, which releases CO2

We chop down or burn large areas of forest, which means less ability to remove CO2

CO2 in the atmosphere absorbs more heat from the sun so the planet’s temperature rises

Methane trapped in ice near the Arctic gets released and absorbs heat even better than CO2

But then again I could give you plenty of schoolchildren who understand this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fernandopartridge

NorthernWisdom

Well-Known Member
Apr 23, 2013
22,007
12,371
363
Science validates itself through physical evidence and peer review. When new evidence comes along, ideas get refined or rejected. The medical evidence on smoking didn’t start to emerge until the last few decades once cancer was better understood.

As for climate change the basics are irrefutable

We burn fossil fuels, which releases CO2

We chop down or burn large areas of forest, which means less ability to remove CO2

CO2 in the atmosphere absorbs more heat from the sun so the planet’s temperature rises

Methane trapped in ice near the Arctic gets released and absorbs heat even better than CO2

But then again I could give you plenty of schoolchildren who understand this.
Personally I go for the bloke down the pub for my predictions, rather than people who have studied it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sick Boy

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2012
8,171
1,264
113
Science validates itself through physical evidence and peer review. When new evidence comes along, ideas get refined or rejected. The medical evidence on smoking didn’t start to emerge until the last few decades once cancer was better understood.

As for climate change the basics are irrefutable

We burn fossil fuels, which releases CO2

We chop down or burn large areas of forest, which means less ability to remove CO2

CO2 in the atmosphere absorbs more heat from the sun so the planet’s temperature rises

Methane trapped in ice near the Arctic gets released and absorbs heat even better than CO2

But then again I could give you plenty of schoolchildren who understand this.
Yes...science also demonstrates drugs (scientific papers are scrutinised by peers, & establishment scientists) are safe & effective. Then occasionally they are withdrawn because they are not safe.


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2012
8,171
1,264
113
Personally I go for the bloke down the pub for my predictions, rather than people who have studied it.
Just one bloke spouting one side of the story? Or do you listen to other sides too?

Some of the 'experts' people spout about are deemed to be so by the media outlets that refer to them to add credibility to their news piece.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2013
25,341
10,365
263
Just one bloke spouting one side of the story? Or do you listen to other sides too?

Some of the 'experts' people spout about are deemed to be so by the media outlets that refer to them to add credibility to their news piece.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
So global warming is a conspiracy theory from a media outlet?
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2012
18,340
5,092
213
Coventry
Yes...science also demonstrates drugs (scientific papers are scrutinised by peers, & establishment scientists) are safe & effective. Then occasionally they are withdrawn because they are not safe.


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Must have missed out on the conspiracy in my scientific career Baz. You really have no clue about it do you?
 

Astute

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2011
30,776
7,515
263
Cumbria
I'm not twisting anything I'm asking a question. Is it a good idea or not to spunk £15 billion on a bridge nobody thinks can be built?
Would you like to explain what the words 'waste of money' means if it is said by me and then what it means if said by someone that you always agree with?
 

SkyblueBazza

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2012
8,171
1,264
113
Must have missed out on the conspiracy in my scientific career Baz. You really have no clue about it do you?
Well what I have referred to has happened a fair number of times. In fact I know that two drugs can be compared with the same inclusion criteria & be found to show different results. No mention of conspiracy there btw...except from yourself. Science is not always exacting!

Think about experts like...the meteorologists! They are weather experts. They get it right all the time in ypur little world I'm sure. Meanwhile in the real world...

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk