Astute
Well-Known Member
But explain why we should have to give up on sovereignty just so we can trade with the EU.
But explain why we should have to give up on sovereignty just so we can trade with the EU.If you have to adhere to EU rules and regulations, it’s at the expense of sovereignty because we’re not setting our own rules.
In the scenario I laid out, we wouldn’t have to give up soveigbty, but we will invariably be worse off with trade tariffs because we have a trade deficit, importing more than we export. What you’re saying is a strength, is actually a weakness without free trade.
Oh yes another fucking foreigner with an anti British agenda. Congrats you twat !
You’re even calling a Northern Irish person a foreigner. Totally off your head. Go back to your horrible village. It’s missing an idiot.
So that is why we should lose sovereignty so we can trade? Don't be silly.
And the EU doesn't give in when others won't give in to their demands?
They have agreed a budget with Italy which is much higher than they said they would allow them. How has that happened?
Foreigner? I’m more British than you could ever dream of being.
Anti British? My blue flag with gold stars waving will begin in February when I’ll be attending an international indoor athletics event to support team EU.
I try not to read pro EU or pro leave bollocks. You supplied a pro EU link.The Italian budget has literally no relevance to the discussion. Why have you even brought that up?
Corrected it for you.
I try not to read pro EU or pro leave bollocks. You supplied a pro EU link.
You said nobody would have done better than May. But when someone stands up to the EU they back down. Just like they have with Italy.
OK. Would you like to make a list of countries that let someone else make up their rules, regulations and laws so they can trade with them?
Read what you have put then reconsider your thoughts.The saying ‘ignorance is bliss’ has never been so appropriate.
Access to the Single Market requires adherence to EU rules and regulations. That is the price The EU has put on that market access.
So that is why we should lose sovereignty so we can trade? Don't be silly.
And the EU doesn't give in when others won't give in to their demands?
They have agreed a budget with Italy which is much higher than they said they would allow them. How has that happened?
Read what you have put then reconsider your thoughts.
After rules and regulations you missed out laws.
And yet again I ask the same question. Why?
Yes they are trying to rule countries in the EU. This is the part that doesn't sit well with me. We have to follow rules, regulations and laws set by the EU. But they don't follow them themselves. For example look at the Selmayr debacle. Can you imagine what the EU would do if we had a total disregard for the rules and regulations like they had?
You like to talk about financial matters also.
So at the top of the EU you have Juncker. He set up tax dodges that cost many billions each year when he was in charge of his country. Those in the EU wanted an enquiry. But strangely enough if there was an enquiry Juncker would have been in charge of it. Let's move onto Tusk. When he was in charge of his country there was a massive ponzi scheme where a lot of people lost their life savings. They knew about it but did nothing. His son worked for it. Poland recently had an enquiry into the matter. When they questioned Tusk he said they were like the UK and looking like going out of the EU when they didn't want to go. A veiled threat? Because he also said they wouldn't fight to keep Poland in like they were fighting to keep us in the EU.
Yes rules and regulations are good. But not when those who set them don't keep to them. Yet they expect everyone else to keep to them.
Yeah, but there's also a fair few deaf people come forwards and say he definitely said 'people'.Out of pure coincidence, Evelyn Glennie, one of the worlds greatest percussionists, who happens to be stone deaf, was just about to go on the Jez Vine show when this broke today, so they asked her to lip read it, she said 100% "stupid woman" I'm no Jezza fan, but so fucking what if that's what he said, I'd have been happier if he had just called her a stupid c**t.
The saying ‘ignorance is bliss’ has never been so appropriate.
Access to the Single Market requires adherence to EU rules and regulations. That is the price The EU has put on that market access.
This link has no leaning on pro-Remain or pro-EU, it’s an analysis on all sorts of FTAs, such as NAFTA.
Free Trade Agreements and Sovereignty - The Permaculture Research Institute
Yeah, but there's also a fair few deaf people come forwards and say he definitely said 'people'.
It doesn't really matter, apart from the fact that a lot of the right wing press are all over it and have it as their number one headline.
?
Oh. You mean what you’re going to twist what I actually said into at some point probably in the very near future.
"Ireland unveils 'stark' contingency plans for no-deal Brexit" - Ireland unveils 'stark' contingency plans for no-deal Brexit | ReutersRead what you have put then reconsider your thoughts.
After rules and regulations you missed out laws.
And yet again I ask the same question. Why?
Yes they are trying to rule countries in the EU. This is the part that doesn't sit well with me. We have to follow rules, regulations and laws set by the EU. But they don't follow them themselves. For example look at the Selmayr debacle. Can you imagine what the EU would do if we had a total disregard for the rules and regulations like they had?
You like to talk about financial matters also.
So at the top of the EU you have Juncker. He set up tax dodges that cost many billions each year when he was in charge of his country. Those in the EU wanted an enquiry. But strangely enough if there was an enquiry Juncker would have been in charge of it. Let's move onto Tusk. When he was in charge of his country there was a massive ponzi scheme where a lot of people lost their life savings. They knew about it but did nothing. His son worked for it. Poland recently had an enquiry into the matter. When they questioned Tusk he said they were like the UK and looking like going out of the EU when they didn't want to go. A veiled threat? Because he also said they wouldn't fight to keep Poland in like they were fighting to keep us in the EU.
Yes rules and regulations are good. But not when those who set them don't keep to them. Yet they expect everyone else to keep to them.
Absolute bollocks from start to finish. And you know it is.They are not trying to rule countries. They are the countries of the Union pooling their sovereignty to make a stronger Union.
Back to Selmayr. Selmayr was appointed by a college of 3 as allowed in a case of urgency. There were 2 inquiries which confirmed that. People were not happy about how and who defined urgency. As a comparison, May appointed our head of the Civil Service on her own without consultation as a matter of urgency. There were no inquiries and no one could do anything about it as there was no defined procedure for a transparent appointment.
Tusk‘s son worked for an airline owned by the Ponzi scheme. This had nothing to do with the EU.
The present right wing government in Poland doesn’t like Tusk and is trying to suppress some parts of democracy in Poland by breaking agreed EU rules on protecting the democratic functions of the individual states. Tusk wouldn’t fight for them to stay, but he has no say on their membership.
Tusk was annoyed because they made statements or suggestions at the public hearing and wouldn’t let him answer, or just turned his mike off so that TV viewers couldn’t hear his answers.
Just because you write „veiled threat“ doesn’t mean it was. He has no power to expel a country as representative of a council of 28 sovereign states.
Juncker allowed lax laws on banking whilst he was PM of Luxemburg. That was not in his EU capacity.
The EU is bringing out coordinated controls to make tax evasion harder. Hence leave lobby groups and think tanks urgently pushing us to crash out of the EU. More relevant to the UK at the present than Juncker‘s CV. You won’t be calling them out though or praising the EU for taking coordinated action.
Although you claim to be neutral.
I am starting to favour the no deal. Because the no deal means we are not tied to the EU until they are willing to let us go. And the EU no deal contingency is carry on as we are now for 12 months after we leave. In other words similar to what they offered May but without the backstop and with a timescale. Then we have 12 months to make a deal between us."Ireland unveils 'stark' contingency plans for no-deal Brexit" - Ireland unveils 'stark' contingency plans for no-deal Brexit | Reuters
Highlights several things about the impact of 'no deal'...Paragraphs 10-12 is indication of either reinforcing what I know you & I have said before about EU changing rules when it suits them. I think that this so far stubborn 'no other deal' approach will begin to weaken the closer we get to no deal.
As for Tusk's stance on Poland...it devalues one member...but puts perpective on all but 3-4 other members as to their importance in the EU in reality. Like a football team, even just one player can upset the whole squad's performance. Perhaps the rot inside the core is beginning to manifest elsewhere in the apple?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Absolute bollocks from start to finish. And you know it is.
As you know they looked into the Selmayr debacle. They said rules and regulations were broke. But they were handed a big bribe. They ended up getting paid well after leaving their role. Worth over a quarter of a million each for those in the investigation. Even you had to admit this. So then nothing was done. Have you forgotten already?
This is why it is impossible to try and have a debate with you. You just lie all the time. Go take your bullshit elsewhere.
I am starting to favour the no deal. Because the no deal means we are not tied to the EU until they are willing to let us go. And the EU no deal contingency is carry on as we are now for 12 months after we leave. In other words similar to what they offered May but without the backstop and with a timescale. Then we have 12 months to make a deal between us.
The only problem is that it means we WILL be leaving. And I'm not sure it is the right thing to do. Yes those running the EU are totally incompetent, corrupt and untrustworthy. But there are still benefits of being in the EU.
A much better idea than leaving would be to make the changes that are needed in the EU. Macron is the latest leader to say so. But I can't see them wanting to give up the power they have on the present 28 members.
More lies.You keep on about „they“. Who are „they“?
Macron wants reforms. Merkel wants reforms. Everyone wants reforms. Everyone has a different version of reforms. Macron wants a fiscal union for the Eurozone, but you would say they want to rule us by telling us how to set our taxes. Merkel wants to share the burden of refugees. I don’t need to mention your answer to that. So if you think there should be reforms, then tell us what they are.
More lies.
I didn't even use the word 'they'
Yes they all want reform. Many have wanted reform for years. But all is happening is they are taking even more power instead of looking at reform. They are in charge. The leaders of the countries in the EU are not in charge.
Merkel wants to share the burden of refugees? So why are they stranded in Greece and Italy? Because the prisons they want for them were said to be illegal.
Yes on the post after you said it. And there was no doubt each time I used the word either.Hilarious. You went on about them and they. „They are in charge“.
What prisons are you on about?
Yes on the post after you said it. And there was no doubt each time I used the word either.
Can't you see that people are not as thick as you would like them to be?
The so called holding areas that were supposed to go where anyone would have them. But they were deemed illegal. Yes a good plan on a good way to treat refugees.
Yep completely agree. I’d prefer adult insults rather than babyish stuff. So stupid woman is about right but viscious, nasty, lacking compassion, mechanistic evil would all workOut of pure coincidence, Evelyn Glennie, one of the worlds greatest percussionists, who happens to be stone deaf, was just about to go on the Jez Vine show when this broke today, so they asked her to lip read it, she said 100% "stupid woman" I'm no Jezza fan, but so fucking what if that's what he said, I'd have been happier if he had just called her a stupid c**t.
"Ireland unveils 'stark' contingency plans for no-deal Brexit" - Ireland unveils 'stark' contingency plans for no-deal Brexit | Reuters
Highlights several things about the impact of 'no deal'...Paragraphs 10-12 is indication of either reinforcing what I know you & I have said before about EU changing rules when it suits them. I think that this so far stubborn 'no other deal' approach will begin to weaken the closer we get to no deal.
As for Tusk's stance on Poland...it devalues one member...but puts perpective on all but 3-4 other members as to their importance in the EU in reality. Like a football team, even just one player can upset the whole squad's performance. Perhaps the rot inside the core is beginning to manifest elsewhere in the apple?
Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk
Norway would be one wouldn’t they?I try not to read pro EU or pro leave bollocks. You supplied a pro EU link.
You said nobody would have done better than May. But when someone stands up to the EU they back down. Just like they have with Italy.
OK. Would you like to make a list of countries that let someone else make up their rules, regulations and laws so they can trade with them?
I like it when you balance opinions. I think no deal will be disastrous for businessI am starting to favour the no deal. Because the no deal means we are not tied to the EU until they are willing to let us go. And the EU no deal contingency is carry on as we are now for 12 months after we leave. In other words similar to what they offered May but without the backstop and with a timescale. Then we have 12 months to make a deal between us.
The only problem is that it means we WILL be leaving. And I'm not sure it is the right thing to do. Yes those running the EU are totally incompetent, corrupt and untrustworthy. But there are still benefits of being in the EU.
A much better idea than leaving would be to make the changes that are needed in the EU. Macron is the latest leader to say so. But I can't see them wanting to give up the power they have on the present 28 members.
More lies.
I didn't even use the word 'they'
Yes they all want reform. Many have wanted reform for years. But all is happening is they are taking even more power instead of looking at reform. They are in charge. The leaders of the countries in the EU are not in charge.
Merkel wants to share the burden of refugees? So why are they stranded in Greece and Italy? Because the prisons they want for them were said to be illegal.
For those like her and others in her party that thinks food banks are 'empowering' - c*nt is a wholly accurate description.Yep completely agree. I’d prefer adult insults rather than babyish stuff. So stupid woman is about right but viscious, nasty, lacking compassion, mechanistic evil would all work
We are on the same page thereI am starting to favour the no deal. Because the no deal means we are not tied to the EU until they are willing to let us go. And the EU no deal contingency is carry on as we are now for 12 months after we leave. In other words similar to what they offered May but without the backstop and with a timescale. Then we have 12 months to make a deal between us.
The only problem is that it means we WILL be leaving. And I'm not sure it is the right thing to do. Yes those running the EU are totally incompetent, corrupt and untrustworthy. But there are still benefits of being in the EU.
A much better idea than leaving would be to make the changes that are needed in the EU. Macron is the latest leader to say so. But I can't see them wanting to give up the power they have on the present 28 members.
Oh yes another fucking foreigner with an anti British agenda. Congrats you twat !
You are discussing on a relatively high level with a brick wall. Expect your words to be twisted, all your links to rational explanations to be declared as pro EU ( or bilge ), and if you keep proving him ( and others like him ) wrong you will be increasingly insulted, called a traitor and asked if you can identify a player who played 5 games in 1992, or similar. You may also be called a „fxxking foreigner“ if you don’t live, or come from, an unknown village near Coventry which has become a hell hole because of the EU, black lads, Muslims and drug Dealers.
You may be wrong in your assumption that „ignorance is bliss“ as there are some very angry people on here. They don’t appear to live in bliss.
She signed the Single European Act in 1986 which created the Single Market and thus all the regulations that came with it.So you think Maggie would have given her power to what the EU became?
Single European Act that Maggie signed, forerunner to MaastrichtShe might have been against Brexit. But she wouldn't have handed our power over to the EU.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?