Brexited | the worst threads live the longest

[DomesticTadpole]

It's like talking to a brick wall on this issue.

I'll give the leavers one thing: hell of an imagination.

It will be entertaining to see their joy when they realise they won't be getting everything they want, especially the most important thing to them, freedom of movement.

 

[africanspur]

a referendum that cost the UK economy billions. The world is in a state of chaos at the moment and the English want to throw more gasoline on the fire just to fulfil their nationalist agenda of getting away from nasty old Europe. Of course Johnson, Gove and Farage can make as much noise they want as is their democratic right but don't expect Europe to cave into the British opportunism.

I must make clear that I was referring to what the Tory politician said not the woman in the audience.

That can be turned around quite easily, you must surely be able to see that?

Considering I was told by the English 2 years ago that we'd only survive within the UK, that I wouldn't be able to enter the eu again if we left, that I wouldn't be allowed to use the sterling if I left (ie scaremongering), I would be rather pissed that the English have now dragged me out of Europe, despite the country convincingly voting to remain. (said as if I was a scot).

 

[ivaldo]

There will be no free trade without freedom of movement.

That's entirely up to the EU. As I said it's in everyone's best interests to continue with free trade and would be a childish and vindictive decision to deny that. Why would you want to be a member of a union that would go against its members best interests just to be spiteful?

 

[GloryHunter07]

I think Cameron has played a blinder here, dropped Boris and friends right in the proverbial.

I agree. Boris has made the bed, he should lie in it.

Its also funny that the Leave campaign, so obsessed with "democracy", will end up giving us an un-elected PM.

 

[Minimalist]

That's entirely up to the EU. As I said it's in everyone's best interests to continue with free trade and would be a childish and vindictive decision to deny that. Why would you want to be a member of a union that would go against its members best interests just to be spiteful?

So you think if the EU or whoever says freedom of movement is required, Boris and company will care enough to say 'no deal'.

Won't happen. They don't care about it. It's a non issue to them.

 

[Cheesy]

It is unreasonable to expect a referendum in the near future IMO. It isn't about democracy, it is about common sense. The smoke needs to clear before we make the world even more uncertain.

I don't like the SNP but do admire their savvy (or cunning) and audacity. No doubt they will fight to keep the £ again when they 'leave'.

The thing is that I don't like about the SNP and a lot of their supporters is that they are not honest enough to be straight and just admit it is about nationalism.

Joining the EU right now is frankly extremely stupid for a relatively prosperous country.

This is the problem though...it's really not. It's for a variety of factors, and nationalism is actually quite small at the moment. We feel marginalised in a UK which is increasingly voting against our own interests...Tory governments we haven't elected (and will not elect), and being dragged out of the EU despite over 60% of our population voting to remain, and every single area voting to remain.

That's not nationalism. To have a strong desire for independence in such circumstances is fecking common sense. Even the Scottish Tories, the supposed strong voice of Scottish unionism, are planning to become an independent Scottish party if Boris gets into power. If Boris' own fecking colleagues north of the border do not trust him, then why on earth should we? And it doesn't matter if it's not him; it's still going to be someone we haven't voted for and will not vote for.

There's no genuine UK voice for Scotland either...apart from the SNP, who have shown themselves to be by far the most capable party. Labour are done for, and we're never going to go UKIP/Tory. Very little point in remaining in an unstable, uncertain union which does not work for us at all.

 

[Xeno]

That's entirely up to the EU. As I said it's in everyone's best interests to continue with free trade and would be a childish and vindictive decision to deny that. Why would you want to be a member of a union that would go against its members best interests just to be spiteful?

Why would you give 'special treatment' to someone who just left your club? Do you actually think we'll get the benefits of membership without the (perceived) negatives? That's seems, for want of a better word, deluded.

 

[Cheesy]

That can be turned around quite easily, you must surely be able to see that?

Considering I was told by the English 2 years ago that we'd only survive within the UK, that I wouldn't be able to enter the eu again if we left, that I wouldn't be allowed to use the sterling if I left (ie scaremongering), I would be rather pissed that the English have now dragged me out of Europe, despite the country convincingly voting to remain. (said as if I was a scot).

Pretty much. Being told by someone that our Scottish referendum cost billions when the UK currently throws itself into uncertainty is beyond absurd. It's fecking ridiculous. As you say, every single promise made to us at that point has been utterly pissed over and broken. I'm not even sure we'd want to use the pound at this point anyway; as bizarre as it may sound, I wouldn't be completely against us adopting the euro if it was potentially beneficial. Whether that'd be the case remains to be seen, of course.

 

[NoLogo]

That's entirely up to the EU. As I said it's in everyone's best interests to continue with free trade and would be a childish and vindictive decision to deny that. Why would you want to be a member of a union that would go against its members best interests just to be spiteful?

It's also about England not paying their fair due to maintaining the infrastructure within the trade zone of the EU. Why would the EU allow someone just to reap the trading benefits of a big union but not shoulder any of the cost. That would be silly. English goods should pay customs just like every other country that isn't coming in the EU.

 

[ivaldo]

Why would you give 'special treatment' to someone who just left your club? Do you actually think we'll get the benefits of membership without the (perceived) negatives? That's seems, for want of a better word, deluded.

You don't give 'special treatment', because that treatment is already happening with other countries who aren't part of the 'club'.

I'll ask you it simply, do you think it would benefit the nations and citizens of the EU and the UK to continue trading freely?

 

[ivaldo]

It's also about England not paying their fair due to maintaining the infrastructure within the trade zone of the EU. Why would the EU allow someone just to reap the trading benefits of a big union but not shoulder any of the cost. That would be silly. English goods should be taxed just like every other goods are taxed that aren't coming from within the EU.

I agree and I've already said we should paid contributions for that very reason.

 

[Xeno]

You don't give 'special treatment', because that treatment is already happening with other countries who aren't part of the 'club'.

I'll ask you it simply, do you think it would benefit the nations and citizens of the EU and the UK to continue trading freely?

If it's as simple as yes/no trade/no trade, obviously it is better to trade freely. It's not that simple though, is it?

You're being obtuse, because the EU cannot offer unencumbered free trade to us; they don't offer it to their members, so how can they give us a better deal than their members.

Edit: it's not just contributions. Contributions and freedom of movement are equally relevant.

 

[JPRouve]

You don't give 'special treatment', because that treatment is already happening with other countries who aren't part of the 'club'.

I'll ask you it simply, do you think it would benefit the nations and citizens of the EU and the UK to continue trading freely?

If the UK pay, yes. For free, no.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

That can be turned around quite easily, you must surely be able to see that?

Considering I was told by the English 2 years ago that we'd only survive within the UK, that I wouldn't be able to enter the eu again if we left, that we wouldn't be allowed to use the sterling if we left (ie scaremongering), I would imagine quite a few Scots are now rather pissed that the English have now dragged them out of Europe, despite the country convincingly voting to remain.

I understand where you are coming from of course and that you are pissed off with how to vote went (as am I) so I am sure you can also understand why Westminster will have a Scottish referendum low down on the list of priorities.

The SNP probably don't even want it themselves for a few years given the sorry state of the EU, they are just exploiting the raw emotion of the referendum to cement the divide between England and Scotland.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

If the UK pay, yes. For free, no.

I think he clarified it later that we should pay our way.

 

[Zarlak]

It is unreasonable to expect a referendum in the near future IMO. It isn't about democracy, it is about common sense. The smoke needs to clear before we make the world even more uncertain.

I don't like the SNP but do admire their savvy (or cunning) and audacity. No doubt they will fight to keep the £ again when they 'leave'.

The thing is that I don't like about the SNP and a lot of their supporters is that they are not honest enough to be straight and just admit it is about nationalism.

Joining the EU right now is frankly extremely stupid for a relatively prosperous country.

Leavers were told in advance that this would happen. They were told that Scotland would leave if this happened, they decided to dismiss it and vote for it anyway. It's not unreasonable at all, because the leavers were well aware in advance that it was going to happen but they dismissed it as 'scaremongering'. We voted for this to happen as a country, and we will have to deal with every consequence.

We can't vote against everything we knew was going to happen and then say 'hang on guys, don't do this it'll feck us up!' Of course it will. That's why the vast majority of experts advised to remain.

 

[ivaldo]

If the UK pay, yes. For free, no.

Which is exactly what I said, we pay a significant contribution for the privilege.

If it's as simple as yes/no trade/no trade, obviously it is better to trade freely. It's not that simple though, is it?

You're being obtuse, because the EU cannot offer unencumbered free trade to us; they don't offer it to their members, so how can they give us a better deal than their members.

If, as I said several times, we paid contributions to continue that agreement, how are we getting a better deal than its members?

 

[Classical Mechanic]

@Cheesy

Joining a failing currency that is in deep trouble is not a good idea which is why the SNP wanted to keep the £.

 

[JPRouve]

I think he clarified it later that we should pay our way.

I know but he said that it was his opinion, an opinion that isn't necessarily shared by everyone.

 

[Xeno]

If, as I said several times, we paid contributions to continue that agreement, how are we getting a better deal than its members?

Because the members pay contributions and have freedom of movement.

 

[Mozza]

Or the EU will have to go the route of less Europe and become a genuine economic community.

What is this less Europe you invision?

 

[ivaldo]

Because the members pay contributions and have freedom of movement.

So you beleive freedom of movement is a bad thing then?

Because if you beleive, as you've stated, the UK would be getting a better deal than EU members, the idea of freedom of movement can only be a negative.

 

[redshaw]

Reminds me of the hard line Scotland was given when they wanted out of the UK. No going back, no pound, you'll face problems, we won't be cooperative, basically sling your hook. Now the shoe is on the other foot, we want various EU deals and passporting and to be all conducted nicely over a large time frame.

 

[endless_wheelies]

Because the members pay contributions and have freedom of movement.

I thought that to be part of the single market you had to have freedom of movement? Is there currently any country that has one but not the other?

 

[rcoobc]

I'm watching question time. Can you tell everyone to stop clapping after every single sentence. We aren't in America.

 

[Classical Mechanic]

What is this less Europe you invision?

A genuine economic union, not a political one. Brussels is too remote, too murky and too undemocratic IMO.

 

[Xeno]

So you beleive freedom of movement is a bad thing then?

Because if you beleive, as you've stated, the UK would be getting a better deal than EU members, the idea of freedom of movement can only be a negative.

Congratulations on avoiding the point. It's a condition of entry, it will be +ve or -ve depending on your POV. I think FoM is great; many leavers don't but you think we'll somehow get all the same benefits of access to free market without the same 'conditions'.

 

[Cheesy]

@Cheesy

Joining a failing currency that is in deep trouble is not a good idea which is why the SNP wanted to keep the £.

We wanted to join the £ at the time, although options change. I doubt the SNP will go for a currency union now; too volatile depending on what happens with the £.

 

[JPRouve]

A genuine economic union, not a political one. Brussels is too remote, too murky and too undemocratic IMO.

What is undemocratic about Brussel and Strasbourg? And a lot of Europeans want the political union.

 

[ivaldo]

Congratulations on avoiding the point. It's a condition of entry, it will be +ve or -ve depending on your POV. I think FoM is great; many leavers don't but you think we'll somehow get all the same benefits of access to free market without the same 'conditions'.

Not at all. I've asked you a very direct question and you've failed to answer it. By your very definition freedom of trade is a bad thing, or you would not argue that the UK would be getting a better deal.

There is no reason whatsoever that you cannot segregate free trade and freedom of movement, no reason. They are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Minimalist]

Not at all. I've asked you a very direct question and you've failed to answer it. By your very definition freedom of trade is a bad thing, or you would not argue that the UK would be getting a better deal.

There is no reason whatsoever that you cannot segregate free trade and freedom of movement, no reason. They are not mutually exclusive.

So again, if you would please answer the question: do you think there is any likelihood this will be achieved?

 

[Xeno]

Not at all. I've asked you a very direct question and you've failed to answer it. By your very definition freedom of trade is a bad thing, or you would not argue that the UK would be getting a better deal.

There is no reason whatsoever that you cannot segregate free trade and freedom of movement, no reason. They are not mutually exclusive.

You asked me if I thought FoM was negative. I categorically stated both my position and my thoughts behind it. Can't be any direct than that.

 

[Mozza]

A genuine economic union, not a political one. Brussels is too remote, too murky and too undemocratic IMO.

Not a good enough answer. What areas of law that Europe does now do you think should be handled by the nations themselves?

 

[C'est Moi Cantona]

I'm watching question time. Can you tell everyone to stop clapping after every single sentence. We aren't in America.

Had to turn it over for that exact reason.

 

[ivaldo]

You asked me if I thought FoM was negative. I categorically stated both my position and my thoughts behind it. Can't be any direct than that.

Which entirely contradicts your previous statement that the UK would get a better deal if it retained his free trade rights (at a fair cost) and not freedom of movement. That categorically makes freedom of movement a negative in your statement.

 

[ivaldo]

So again, if you would please answer the question: do you think there is any likelihood this will be achieved?

It's certainly a possibility in the future.

 

[Xeno]

Which entirely contradicts your previous statement that the UK would get a better deal if it retained his free trade rights (at a fair cost) and not freedom of movement. That categorically makes freedom of movement a negative in your statement.

You have outmaneuvered me with your stupidity. Next you'll call me out on ad hominem.

 

[JPRouve]

So again, if you would please answer the question: do you think there is any likelihood this will be achieved?

I think that it's possible but it will cost more money and I suspect that the UK will have free movement agreements with some of the EU members negotiated at the national level.

 

[Mozza]

I think that it's possible but it will cost more money and I suspect that the UK will have free movement agreements with some of the EU members negotiated at the national level.

You negotiate with the EU collectively, otherwise what's the point of the EU?

 

[Paul the Wolf]

Pound dropping again against Euro and US$ - and down it goes again - how far down it will go , nobody knows