Brexit: Parliament Suspended

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Tiassa, Aug 29, 2019.

  1. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Why should the EU allow the UK to continue to have the same arrangements (and benefits) of a member state, without being a member state?

    The UK's Leave campaign was one of 'the EU is shit, we don't want to be connected to them anymore'.. And now the EU is supposed to give the UK everything it wants? If the EU was so shit, why does the UK demand to maintain the same arrangements with the EU?

    It's like leasing a house to a tenant, who trashes your place, terminates the lease early, tells you your house is shit and moves out, then tells you that they want to keep the keys and keep using the pool when they feel like it and you'd be cool with this, yeah?

    But they don't anymore.

    Polls are showing that people who voted to leave would now change their vote to remain.

    Hindsight. Something something about it.

    They never had a plan to begin with.

    Their heads were so far up their racist and nationalistic white backsides, that they were unable to formulate any plans for how Brexit would actually occur and what should take place.

    It's not that they are telling people they do not understand. They do not understand it themselves. They clearly do not know what they are doing. And this is solely on them.

    What we are now seeing from the pro-Brexit politicians is a bunch of entitled whining because they were actually of the belief that the EU would somehow just bow to their demands after they went out of their way to campaign to leave the EU because they thought it was all shit... And then trying to blame everyone else for their own failures.

    Boris wanted this.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It's his now. He owns it.

    Now he will have to contend with a swiftly changing attitude to Brexit from the UK populace.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,077
    SOME of the same arrangements, those which benefit both sides

    I hold they want to leave

    EU wants UK to stay because I suspect while UK is not a lynch pin holding EU together I suspect UK will do better outside of the EU and trigger other countries to look to leave also

    The weak countries want to remain to sponge off the stronger

    I might even go as far as downloading the BREXIT pod cast to add to my how to increase your wasting time apps

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Such as?

    Free movement and employment? Err given the UK's Leave campaign focused on foreign immigration as a talking point to leave, resulting in an exodus of EU workers (such as nurses) from the UK in the year after the Brexit vote, how well do you think that's going to go down? How would it benefit the EU equally to the UK?

    How about fishing rights? The Brexit campaign had fishing as a main point of leaving. The general whine that the EU was taking all of the UK's fish. While deliberately ignoring the fact that the majority of the fish and most popular fish eaten in the UK is actually fished off EU countries and Norway.. So how does it benefit the EU if the UK will now allow EU fishing trawlers to fish in UK waters?

    Scientific research? The EU supports member states and institutions accordingly. Do you think they should fund a non member State like the UK that chose to leave?

    Trade? Okay...? The UK imports more from the UK than it exports. To wit, the EU is will be able to source those products from within the EU even after the UK leave.

    Galileo satellite navigation system? Developed by the EU for EU usage.. Why should they allow the UK to piggy back on it?

    Ireland? The UK didn't really think much about that, did they? Ireland has a right to secure its borders from non EU member countries, particularly one that has such an awful history when it comes to Ireland to begin with and the UK seemed to have forgotten that Northern Ireland existed when they all vapidly voted "Leave".

    Security and defense? The UK is aligning itself with Trump even more as it pushes further to the far right. Trump has indicated numerous times how he feels about NATO and the EU in general and his winking at Putin, who poses a direct risk to EU member countries and allies in the region. So what benefit does the UK bring to the EU?

    The point is that the EU will manage quite well without the UK. The UK is now scrambling to try to get trade deals in place with every country, because those in Government who supported Brexit, including Boris and co, had no bloody idea just what was needed to exist outside of the EU - Because they would have been children before the UK joined the EU. The EU had all of this in place for its member countries. Now the UK has to do all of this on their own.

    Stating that there is some benefit for the EU to allow the UK to get what it wants with very little in return is ridiculous. The EU is under no obligation to make Boris' life easier. As I noted above, he wanted this. Now he gets to own it.

    Despite all evidence that shows how many would change their vote with some hindsight to remain...

    How's that going, by the way?

    The EU currently has existing PTAs with 52 countries, and it is negotiating trade agreements with another 72 countries. In case of Brexit, the UK would therefore need to re-negotiate or start new bilateral negotiations on 124 trade agreements, plus one additional trade agreement re-defining its own trade status as a third country vis-à-vis the EU.​

    The UK have, to date, signed 13 trade agremeents?

    13..

    Like kids invites to a birthday party.

    13 since the Brexit vote.

    And Boris wants to leave at the end of next month?

    So you think they are going to do really well? 13 Trade agreements in what? 2.5 or so years?

    Given that the EU has experienced negotiators and most of the twits in the UK Government who are currently negotiating these deals have never had to do so in their lives.. They are off to a smashing start. 13 Trade agreements signed so far. Only 111 to go! Given it's taken them a few years to get the 13..

    While ignoring that the UK is trying to negotiate deals with the EU that would literally result in their sponging off the EU as a non member state.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447
    i am not contesting your points.

    i am curious about the fishing as it is such a critical industry for the future food security and health of every nation.

    it would seem logical that UK has much vaster fishing stocks than any other European nation.
    i have not researched that.
    now the question is
    specifically in how that fish is sold as a value export.
    my concern is if UK fish in general is being sold for far too little to markets that have been allowed to under cut the critical true value of fish.
    obviously large cattle beef farming is going to be reduced & hopefully the true carbon cost is added to the consumer price.

    as this happens, this should drive up the value of UK fish substantially in a free market(im making a bit of a sarcastic joke in that)
    in reality the food value of fish and the lower carbon cost presents fish as being the #1 protein for the world in a globally aware reality of climate change and modernization of the worlds people into the future.

    if fish prices are locked up and being thrown away to low value markets then it is simply burning billions of pounds in cash that should be going to creating shell fish farms and fish farms.
    that wont help anyone except those mega countrys locked into boom n bust economics making use of cutting down even more trees to graze cattle.

    Beef should be getting positioned as a premium priced more exclusive product as it down sizes production equally and divests into other options like inland marine farming etc.
     
  8. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    an interesting thought and a tad off topic is that it appears inevitable that humans are going to have to become vegan or vegetarian at the very least. As keeping animals for food, is going to become increasingly untenable as the climate changes...Animal extinction, acidification and hot oceans are going to limit fishing stocks. Vegetation Agri, soaks carbon as well of course.. so it seems to me, intuitively, that that is the direction we are all going to have to go in.
     
    RainbowSingularity likes this.
  9. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,451
    Just a tad.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,328
    Just struck me as being a bit silly to be talking about food trade as if it is business as usual when the world is facing what it is facing in the next decade or so...
     
  11. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,451
    Start a thread on it, then. This is about something else.
     
  12. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,882

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Neither tarot nor tea leaves: Transition seems rather apparent.

    Per BBC:

    The Brexit process has turned into a "nightmare", the prime minister of Luxembourg has said after holding talks with UK PM Boris Johnson.

    Xavier Bettel said Mr Johnson had failed to put forward any serious plans to allow a deal by 31 October.

    But Mr Johnson, who cancelled his press conference because of the noise from protesters, said "there's been a lot of work" and "papers have been shared".

    He urged the EU to make "movement" in its opposition to scrap the backstop.

    Mr Johnson said his joint press conference was cancelled over fears the two leaders would have been "drowned out" by pro-EU protesters.

    "I don't think it would have been fair to the prime minister of Luxembourg," he said.

    "I think there was clearly going to be a lot of noise and I think our points might have been drowned out."

    Political editor Laura Kuenssberg said that Number 10 had asked for the press conference to be held inside, according to sources.


    (Fleming↱)

    And it is one thing to note the proximity of loud protests, but, meanwhile, whatever it means that "there's been a lot of work", or, "papers have been shared", PM Bettel noted—standing alone, at the podium—a lack of "concrete proposals at the moment on the table" from his British counterpart's government, and that, "We need written proposals and the time is ticking so stop speaking and act".

    It's just one of these aspects I'm watching, and in part because of the transatlatincally common intersection of conservatism and dysfunctional antisociality. In the U.S., what our both-sides equivocation often overlooks is the difference between Democrats struggling for politically safe formulations, and Republicans, apparently so comfortable in their longtime complaints that gov'ment doesn't work, and elitist politicians always lie, simply making stuff up and expecting it to stick because they believe their own two-bit horsepucky. PM Johnson sounds like a considerably lesser imitation of what he sees the White House getting away with. And let me be clear, it's not just the pretense of alternative facts, but, rather, the apparent belief, so sincerely held as to be tacit and even ineffable, that everybody else will just believe them for the sake of having said so.
    ____________________

    Notes:

    Fleming, Adam. "Brexit is a 'nightmare', says Luxembourg prime minister". BBC News. 16 September 2019. BBC.com. 16 September 2019. https://bbc.in/2kMS7T2
     
  13. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447
    strongly doubt it
    the uk people perceive themselves as being ripped off by globalism and bossed around by EU experimentalist social policy for the very wealthy.
    however UK doesn't have the Wealth of government services that the EU has
    so the UK government is directly undermining the moral equity of the EU policy mandate by taking money away from social services.

    sneaky isnt it
    poor little timmy
    look at him drag himself along the road because he cant afford the new safety standard crutches from the EU
    watch him drag faster when i throw a 1 pound coin down the gutter, and watch his little poor face twist and tort.
    its soo sad it makes me feel lucky.
    i help little timmy once a week like this to remind myself how much i should concentrate on continuing to down size the nasty government that would prevent poor little timmy from becoming the capitalist mega corporation like me.

    FPP Vs MMP
    the majority voted against the tory government with a brexit vote
    but FPP kept the minority government in against the democratic majority to continue policy to deliver a hard BREXIT.

    winning all round then.
    tea and brexits for everyone

    red meat requires transport in refrigerated trucks, it also has a much higher carbon heavy processing requirement.
    it then must be stored and transported again using massive amounts of carbon and fuel.
    once eaten in raw and large amounts then causes massive disease in humans which then costs massive amounts of carbon and pollution riadological and chemical and carbon.

    why dont red meat processing companys give away free off cut(low grade) meat to poor school children to eat to increase their brain growth and organ growth ?

    they could join together and have nation wide BBQ Thursdays or Tuesdays or such like.
    directly adding quality protein to children's diets to help brain muscle and organ development.
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2019
  14. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447
    LoL

    all those fully qualified multi financial degree holding self important nobs dont know how to have a piss-up in a brewery
    all they can do is sit in the corner and wait to be fed stolen pies
    what a bunch of crooks
     
  15. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447
    BOoing of Boris
    poor show ouch chaps my undies

    the democracy voted boris in as leader of the tory party
    how many times did they choose torys ?
    last time was about the 4th time in a row ?

    soo !
    the majority of Poms want Torys
    Boris is the Tory leader
    like him
    hate him
    of want to shag him
    doesnt make any difference to his democratic legitimacy and how is he to blame for the people Voting for BREXIT ?

    sheesh !
    im no Boris-o-phile
    but i can see idiots looking for scape goats to avoid being accountable for real democracy and the compulsory education that must go with the right to vote.
     
  16. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447
  17. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    People were mislead.

    Hell. No. That doesn't even go far enough.

    People were lied to.

    After years of one-sided propaganda – “our fish”, “plundering Europeans”, “a sea of opportunity” – a more complicated picture of European fishing benefits and losses is finally breaking the surface.​

    Sounds about right, yes? With the Brexit campaign that pushed the ideal that the EU were somehow taking all of the fish from UK waters.. Murmurs about quota's and blaming it all on the EU...

    Fisheries (0.12% of the UK economy) have been a powerful symbol for Brexiteers. They may now become one of the starkest examples of the folly of no deal.

    British shellfish sales to the EU (mostly France and Spain) are worth £430m a year – more than a quarter of all UK fish exports by value. They are vital to small-scale fishermen in Scotland and the West Country. They will be devastated overnight if the UK loses paper-free access to the EU single market
    .​

    But a bit more about that myth of the EU stealing or plundering UK fish and oceans... How Brexit was securing your UK fish?

    Overall, the UK imports 70% of the fish we eat and exports 80% of what we catch. The UK already has most of the quotas for haddock and generous quotas for cod (which is anyway growing scarce once again).

    For British boats to catch what EU boats now catch – the so-called “sea of opportunity” – would demand radical changes in British eating habits and/or fish processing and exporting industries. Neither can happen overnight. Where would we wish to export much of the promised El Dorado of fish? To the European Union
    .​

    Keep in mind, that your biggest seller fish wise is shellfish to the EU and the UK makes a ridiculous amount of money from it, and it is the lifeblood of many fishermen in the UK. English people tend to not eat it, and instead, prefer fish that is imported.

    So Brexiter's sold a line that the EU was taking all the fish from UK waters, when the reality is that the English tend to not eat English or local fish and instead prefer imported fish. On top of that, what fish the UK fishing boats do catch that are eaten by the English are caught off EU waters. I mean, one could not make this shit up if one tried.

    A myth has been propagated by Brexiteers. There is a single “British fishing industry” which will benefit from reclaiming the “60/70/80% of British fish” caught by EU boats.

    No, there isn’t. There are competing interests. English v Scottish; deep-sea fishing v inshore fishing; industrial v family-scale boats; fishers v processors. Some of the most vibrant, locally important and ecologically respectful parts of the UK industry have nothing to gain and everything to lose from Brexit.

    They depend on shellfish, lobsters, crabs and langoustines (crayfish) that are quota-free or are overwhelmingly allocated to the UK. More than 80% is sold to the continent (mostly Spain and France). This trade has grown large because of the border-free EU single market.

    Reality:

    Post-Brexit, trucks arriving in France with fish caught by scores of small boats will have to supply scores of “origin” and “health” documents – one for each boat and each catch. Traders will have to find UK local inspectors in working hours to verify the origin of the seafood and vets to certify its quality.

    Little planning has been done in the UK to make any of that possible. The highly perishable trade will add to, and suffer from, the chaos in cross-Channel trade forecast by the leaked government Yellowhammer document. Add to the bouillabaisse the action likely to be taken by justifiably angry French fishermen …

    Justifiably? We are encouraged to believe that it was the EU that first allowed foreign boats to fish in British waters (the exclusive economic zone of up to 200 miles). It wasn’t. The common fisheries policy, first established in 1983, enshrined historic fishing rights. The quotas were based on 1970s catches but the fishing pattern went back for decades and in some cases centuries.

    As for the value of the UK fish..

    One fisherman summed up his concerns on trade and markets:

    I think the main risk is our markets in Europe. I have a fear that there’s a closed-door there and we have a perishable commodity and we have lorries backing up at the channel and fish decreasing in quality, you know, that can hit the price in the market for us
    .
    Hard pass on the fish farms, thanks..
     
  18. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Imagine little Timmy's face when he realises that the UK will literally have less money to spend in the UK after Brexit..

    Supporters of withdrawal argued that ending net contributions to the EU would allow for tax cuts or government spending increases.[6] On the basis of Treasury figures, in 2014 the United Kingdom's gross national contribution (ignoring the rebate) was £18.8 billion, about 1% of GDP, or £350 million a week. Because the UK receives (per capita) less EU spending than other member states, a rebate was negotiated; net of this rebate, the contribution was £14.4 billion, approximately 0.8% of GDP, or £275 million a week. If EU spending in Britain is also taken into account, the average net contribution for the next five years is estimated at about £8 billion a year, which is about 0.4% of national income, or £150 million per week.[53] The Institute for Fiscal Studies have said that the majority of forecasts of the impact of Brexit on the UK economy indicated that the government would have less money to spend even if it no longer had to pay into the EU.
     
  19. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447
    what do those figures mean to the average voter who voted for the tory party that have the democratic majority ?

    https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-49722087

    this should fix it all(extreme sarcasm)



    if it is found to be unlawful
    do they have to give back all their wages ?
    or do they get double pay for that time ?
    can they sack the troy party & hand the government over to Labour ?
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2019
  20. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447



     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2019
  21. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    It means that the Brexit supporters who voted for Brexit because they thought the UK would have more money to spend in the UK instead of paying the EU, are somewhat dim. Because they will now end up with vastly less and things will likely cost more. Winning strategy there!
     
  22. RainbowSingularity Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,447
    lol
    im referring a little deeper on the same line.
    RE the majority Tory party voters
    the pro austerity voters who kept supporting the non public spending labour party and then swing voted to hand the leadership to the torys.
    then continued to vote austerity tory party

    they thought they would suddenly get the local bone collector turn up and drop off a wheel barrow full of cash for them at the letter box when they left the EU.
    seriously ?!?!?!?!?!
    what a bunch of morons
    morons or selfish assholes ?
    it matters little now
    the stable door is wide open the horse is in the vege-patch destroying what it hasn't eaten & heading toward the main house and the back door is wide open

    all they had to do was vote labour and that would prevent BREXIT
    but they will burn the entire family inside the house to spite the red nose of father christmas
    "damn you father christmass and your dirty commy colored red nose painted on by the corporate media you have signed the death warrant of the entire British economy"
    ... MORONS ! played for the selfish suckers they are
    winning ! (extreme sarcasm)

    ...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Analytica

    ?

    pro brexit vote was a vote against globalization(how many tory party hard liners are anti-globalisation?)

    who didnt know that ?
    how did that become the narrative ?
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2019
  23. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Yes. They literally did believe the lie they were fed by the likes of Boris about the money given to the EU would now be spent in the UK.. When in reality, the UK will now have less money to spend in the UK once they leave the EU.

    It's fed by xenophobia and as you noted previously, a sense of victimhood because they believe the EU is stripping the UK of all of its resources and money. It's why Brexit kept pushing the fishing issue, because 'EU boats are in our waters taking all our fish!' and their anger at quotas and availability. They fed this idea of foreigners entering UK waters and taking all the fish. It was a lie. They blamed the EU for this. That too was a lie. These rights were given before the EU. English fishermen often sold their own individual rights to EU fishing vessels for nice sums of money. UK fishermen and companies sell the vast majority of fish they do catch to the EU market, as the English do not eat those fish. Not to mention the fact that fish do not respect borders. Changing climate will mean that the fish will swim elsewhere.

    But they were told that the EU was stripping their oceans of its fish. And people bought it. There is a reason why Brexiters used fishing so extensively while campaigning. And it was essentially wrong and a lie.

    https://www.theguardian.com/comment...paganda-brexit-fish-eu-britain-fishing-rights
    https://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2018/11/28/brexit-and-fishing-why-we-re-all-wrongh
     

Share This Page