The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[ml1dch]

7 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Not really.

As usual, Barnier says not enough progress (for talks on future relationship) and Davis says that they've come on in leaps and bounds. It's almost as though they've attended different negotiations. Did Davis attend any this week?

Yup, business as usual as you say.

With the slight difference that this is the last one before the EU Council meeting next week. 

With the assumption that they agree with Barnier, it'll make the Government response an interesting one.

[tinker]

Its becoming clear to me that there will either be a hard brexit or no brexit , once this is confirmed the implications of either can explored. 

If we still have the stalemate going into the last 12 months of article 50 then the damage to the economy will start to really kick in.

[blandy]

49 minutes ago, tinker said:

Its becoming clear to me that there will either be a hard brexit or no brexit , once this is confirmed the implications of either can explored. 

If we still have the stalemate going into the last 12 months of article 50 then the damage to the economy will start to really kick in.

I don't know about that. Nothing's clear to me. I think though that the number of MP people who want a hard Brexit is pretty small. Just the basic tory nobbers, really. Fox, Mogg, Bone etc. They are in a small minority of all the rest of the MPs. All the other MPs either want a soft Brexit, or don't think Brexit is a good thing at all.

So I suspect as the consequences of a hard Brexit become more widely talked about, with some sense of realism, the noisy hard brexit troublemakers will if anything diminish. So the most logical outcome would be a soft Brexit, because none of the two main parties are (currently) brave enough to say "this Brexit is a big bag o' ...."

It doesn't seem like the mood of people in the country is likely to change decisively against Brexit - it's still round about 50 50 ish, so unless Labour grow a pair, then Soft Brexit steered by them and the less mad tories seems likeliest, doesn't it? Plus, Labour will not want to "own" the consequences of Brexit, or the possible backlash from stopping it, even if stopping it would gain them, or deepen current, support levels overall.

I also think maybe the EU attitude is slightly easing, just slightly. If not now, it will do as the possibility of losing all our money becomes starker and the hit to trade and all the rest. It's not going to make them change their overall stance, but it might make them start to shift a bit in terms of schedule and arrangement of talks and negotiations.

I saw a thing that led to an article in the paper where a journal was saying that many of the poor people who voted leave did so because they have nothing to lose by Brexit. They're already stuffed, so they think how could it get worse for them?

The missing part of that is that, leaving won't make it better for them. It's not a solution to anything. And it will make things worse.

And all the pensioners - they tend to be more set in their ways and views, by and large, so they're not going to change their minds either.

So I reckon some form of soft Brexit happening looks more likely than it being stopped altogether.

[snowychap]

10 minutes ago, blandy said:

Fox, Mogg, Bone

That sounds like a TV programme.

[tonyh29]

22 minutes ago, blandy said:

I don't know about that. Nothing's clear to me. I think though that the number of MP people who want a hard Brexit is pretty small. Just the basic tory nobbers, really. Fox, Mogg, Bone etc. They are in a small minority of all the rest of the MPs. All the other MPs either want a soft Brexit, or don't think Brexit is a good thing at all.

So I suspect as the consequences of a hard Brexit become more widely talked about, with some sense of realism, the noisy hard brexit troublemakers will if anything diminish. So the most logical outcome would be a soft Brexit, because none of the two main parties are (currently) brave enough to say "this Brexit is a big bag o' ...."

It doesn't seem like the mood of people in the country is likely to change decisively against Brexit - it's still round about 50 50 ish, so unless Labour grow a pair, then Soft Brexit steered by them and the less mad tories seems likeliest, doesn't it? Plus, Labour will not want to "own" the consequences of Brexit, or the possible backlash from stopping it, even if stopping it would gain them, or deepen current, support levels overall.

I also think maybe the EU attitude is slightly easing, just slightly. If not now, it will do as the possibility of losing all our money becomes starker and the hit to trade and all the rest. It's not going to make them change their overall stance, but it might make them start to shift a bit in terms of schedule and arrangement of talks and negotiations.

I saw a thing that led to an article in the paper where a journal was saying that many of the poor people who voted leave did so because they have nothing to lose by Brexit. They're already stuffed, so they think how could it get worse for them?

The missing part of that is that, leaving won't make it better for them. It's not a solution to anything. And it will make things worse.

And all the pensioners - they tend to be more set in their ways and views, by and large, so they're not going to change their minds either.

So I reckon some form of soft Brexit happening looks more likely than it being stopped altogether.

Thought I saw a poll yesterday somewhere that said 70% of people polled were in favour of a hard Brexit ... was only around 1000 sample size and I don’t know from what demographic ... but even so it was surprising 

[tinker]

Blandy, your right in what you say, a soft Brexit makes more sense. However neither side  want to back down in the brinkmanship. It's main affect is on the  British pound meaning inflation will rise, goods will cost more. There doesn't appear to be any negative affect on the EU as things stand they have nothing to lose dragging the negotiations out pushing us to hard brexit or recoil from the effects of inflation and have another vote or cancel brexit to try and stabilise economic carnage. Where's our leverage? 

[LondonLax]

15 minutes ago, tinker said:

Blandy, your right in what you say, a soft Brexit makes more sense. However neither side  want to back down in the brinkmanship. It's main affect is on the  British pound meaning inflation will rise, goods will cost more. There doesn't appear to be any negative affect on the EU as things stand they have nothing to lose dragging the negotiations out pushing us to hard brexit or recoil from the effects of inflation and have another vote or cancel brexit to try and stabilise economic carnage. Where's our leverage? 

It's the washing machines remember?

[ml1dch]

32 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

Thought I saw a poll yesterday somewhere that said 70% of people polled were in favour of a hard Brexit ... was only around 1000 sample size and I don’t know from what demographic ... but even so it was surprising 

I'd say far more relevant than those is what they were asked to provide such a meaningless headline.

(A) Do you want economic isolation, gridlock around the ports, no flights out of the country, food shortages and huge job losses?

(B) Is no deal better than a bad deal (sotto voce even though you have no idea what  either of those things actually entail or the consequences of what you just blandly answered)?

Those identical scenarios yield pretty different results depending on what you ask.

[HanoiVillan]

'Bring me more patriotic numbers!'

[tonyh29]

3 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

I'd say far more relevant than those is what they were asked to provide such a meaningless headline.

(A) Do you want economic isolation, gridlock around the ports, no flights out of the country, food shortages and huge job losses?

(B) Is no deal better than a bad deal (sotto voce even though you have no idea what  either of those things actually entail or the consequences of what you just blandly answered)?

Those identical scenarios yield pretty different results depending on what you ask.

Well unless the poll was carried out at the Hospital of Saint Mary of Bethlehem I don’t think you’ll find anyone crazy enough to even consider A) in their decision making 

[ml1dch]

1 minute ago, tonyh29 said:

Well unless the poll was carried out at the Hospital of Saint Mary of Bethlehem I don’t think you’ll find anyone crazy enough to even consider A) in their decision making 

Odd. As yesterday you managed to go from "that would never happen" to agreeing that yes, everything is indeed royally screwed if an agreement isn't reached. It took about an hour and a couple of dozen posts on the internet.

And when it was pointed out that the reason you were so confident is that you'd misunderstood something, you quietly moved on and ignored it.

Given the above, have you considered a cabinet post?

[tonyh29]

13 minutes ago, ml1dch said:

Odd. As yesterday you managed to go from "that would never happen" to agreeing that yes, everything is indeed royally screwed if an agreement isn't reached. It took about an hour and a couple of dozen posts on the internet.

And when it was pointed out that the reason you were so confident is that you'd misunderstood something, you quietly moved on and ignored it.

Given the above, have you considered a cabinet post?

Odd as that isn’t even remotely close to events  ... have you considered being Jeremy Corbyns revisionism writer 

 I try and at least entertain some opinions put in front of me , hence I did concede that in a given sceanaro there could be a problem , but in no way shape  or form did I back track on my view that your doomsday scenario isn’t going to happen .. it simply isn’t and I gave numerous reasons as to why (food and aviation )

in the meantime Edna came in with his opinion and apparently those of all of Germany and I answered him and then others joined in and the debate moved on ... you can have an internet if you feel that means you won but all I’m trying to do is offer some debate beyond we are **** ... people moaned nobody was offering an argument so I’ve tried to offer one , but understand that I am working whilst trying to juggle between serious and irreverent on a web forum and now and again some things are going to slip by 

[ml1dch]

3 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

I try and at least entertain some opinions put in front of me , hence I did concede that in a given sceanaro there could be a problem , but in no way shape  or form did I back track on my view that your doomsday scenario isn’t going to happen .. it simply isn’t and I gave numerous reasons as to why (food and aviation )

Which would have embarrassed a GCSE Politics student.

Your suggestion that aviation was fine was because easyJet has opened a European headquarters. And it's laughable. You didn't know that it's so that easyJet can continue to operate flights in mainland Europe. And has nothing to do with UK aviation, apart from how much money easyJet can make from their current EU cabotage routes.

Given you made such a massive booboo there, it doesn't concern you at all that all those other things you're so pleased about might also be wrong?

[tonyh29]

And we’re done 

 

[snowychap]

21 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

in the meantime Edna

Enda, I think.

[tonyh29]

4 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Enda, I think.

Ah , yes ... sorry Enda

 

Could be worse my bloody predictive text keeps changing my name to Tiny when I sign off on emails ... it’s one thing my phone tracking my browsing history but it’s another thing when it becomes judgemental ...

[snowychap]

Truth to power.

 

p.s. I hate that phrase.

Edited October 12, 2017 by snowychap

[Xann]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

Fair play to the man, he's out turded himself again.

Within that weaselly shit exterior lives a faecal Colossus.

[colhint]

On 10/11/2017 at 15:49, Enda said:

1. You're dragging your feet on the "exit" bill. It's not an exit bill. The EU has requested that you pay only what you have previously signed up to pay, so we don't have to go cancelling science projects we've penciled in.

2. Your notions that we suspend the free movement of labour for you are unreasonable. It's reasonable as a starting point, but we've made it clear time after time after time that we are not sacrificing this crucial part of the European project for you.

3. HM Government's idea that you can sign one page trade deals with countries is unreasonable.

4. Any idea that there can be an open border with NI without it being in the customs union/single market is unreasonable.

5. Any idea that you can be in the customs union/single market without oversight from European courts is unreasonable.

6. Any idea that it is "the EU" preventing an open border, or restricting trade, or whatever, is unreasonable. This is your decision. It is absolutely respected by the EU. You're a sovereign nation deciding your own position. Cool. But it is our sovereign decision to keep our trading agreements that we've built up. This is not the EU's decision, it's yours. Any idea that it is "the EU" preventing an open border, or restricting trade, or whatever, is unreasonable. You can move towards the Norway option once you agree to our pre-conditions on expenses, the border, and the rights of citizens.

I just have to question you about point 1. 

During the EURO crisis which began I think in 2009, several projects were cancelled or postponed, particularly in the poorer states where they couldn't afford to pay their side of the bargain.

So I am wondering, they were all penciled in, and yet because of the state of the Euro were either cancelled or postponed. Now this had nothing to do with the UK. Why didn't they happen. They were penciled in. But the EU stopped them. 

If the money wasn't there then, the money won't be there in 2019. So why should we be expected to pay for all projects penciled in if the EU doesn't keep it's side of the bargain?

[tomsky_11]

11 hours ago, tonyh29 said:

Thought I saw a poll yesterday somewhere that said 70% of people polled were in favour of a hard Brexit ... was only around 1000 sample size and I don’t know from what demographic ... but even so it was surprising 

A poll of 1,000 Sky customers, conducted by text. Solid.