Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Vic said:
Not a single one rose to the challenge.

Too busy backslapping because Barnier realises he's negotiating with liars, moaning about invented insults, and rejoicing that leaving the EU means we can welcome doctors from non-existent African countries.
Click to expand...
Barnier isnt exactly a truth teller is he. He's a politician for a start so by definition so he'd sell his mother/wife/daughter/son/pet (delete as appropriate) if the political gains were sufficient.

Barnier: We can only give you Canada.
...
Boris: I'd like Canada please.
Barnier: Sorry we can't give you a Canada type deal - You're too close to the EU. You have to have something that fully matches our view of the PD.
Boris: OK you want a better deal then. Talk it over with David Frost.
Frost: Michel old chap, you do know there is no more loss of sovereignty from the UK to the EU?
Barnier: The ECJ must have the final say.
Frost & Boris: !?!?
 
Last edited:
Kazzydeyna said:
You're view is perfectly fine my friend. Vile and abhorrent to my ears, but fine in a democracy.

You believe a European passport gives people more rights to live here than an African or Asian passport.

I think that's abhorrent. You think it's fine.

Clearly it's me that's the racist. That's how this works right?
Click to expand...

Your problem is a lack of comprehension not racism. You can’t even grasp that it seems.

Holding a passport from a European country in itself confers no extra rights. A Russian passport is a European passport and your average Russian would have more difficulty entering the UK than Wayne. From next year a British passport will confer no extra rights as they will have been removed. The key is not European. Russia and the UK are European. They key is contracted rights and reciprocated rights.

So being European means nothing in itself. We are European and have opted out of the contract that gave us those extra rights. Your average Frenchman still retains these extra contractual rights. The only difference is the number of countries he can exercise these rights in is now 29 and not 30. We on the other hand went from 30 to 1, being the RoI. And Wayne, poor bastard, is still stuck in customs and it is no easier for him to get in the UK than it was before. It seems our sacrifice was in vain.

Countries that are close tend to have more liberal immigration between them because it is practical to do so, especially if it is a land border. FoM is simply one contractual manifestation of this. Another is more relaxed VISA requirements. If we negotiate relaxed or no VISA requirements with Spain is this racist if we do not do the same with an African or Asian country? No. It is simply putting in place a contractual and reciprocal agreement between two countries in close proximity. Australia and New Zealand have FoM between them because of location and cultural ties. African countries are establishing their version of the EU with FoM, Single Market and common currency. Are they being racist by not including the UK? No. Again shared borders, regionalisation, pooling resources including labour are the driving forces.

The elimination of borders has to start somewhere and it will only start with countries in proximity to each other. We ourselves, a union of nations, are an example of that. Establish enough blocs with FoM then you are on the way to making it more worldwide. Regressing back to borders is just that. Regression. Trying to justify this regression as ‘fighting racism’ is profoundly ignorant and has the opposite effect. It feeds racism. It promotes differences.
 
BlueAnorak said:
Barnier isnt exactly a truth teller is he. He's a politician for a start so by definition so he'd sell his mother/wife/daughter/son/pet (delete as appropriate) if the political gains were sufficient.

Barnier: We can only give you Canada.
...
Boris: I'd like Canada please.
Barnier: Sorry we can't give you a Canada type deal - You're too close to the EU. You have to have something that fully matches our view of the PD.
Boris: OK you want a better deal then. Talk it over with David Frost.
Frost: Michel old chap, you do know there is no more loss of sovereignty from the UK to the EU?
Barnier: The ECJ must have the final say.
Frost & Boris: !?!?
Click to expand...


The UK is asking for a lot more than Canada. The UK doesn’t want Canada. Do you guys actually know what we are asking for because I seem to spend a lot of time correcting you lot.
 
BobKowalski said:
Your problem is a lack of comprehension not racism. You can’t even grasp that it seems.

Holding a passport from a European country in itself confers no extra rights. A Russian passport is a European passport and your average Russian would have more difficulty entering the UK than Wayne. From next year a British passport will confer no extra rights as they will have been removed. The key is not European. Russia and the UK are European. They key is contracted rights and reciprocated rights.

So being European means nothing in itself. We are European and have opted out of the contract that gave us those extra rights. Your average Frenchman still retains these extra contractual rights. The only difference is the number of countries he can exercise these rights in is now 29 and not 30. We on the other hand went from 30 to 1, being the RoI. And Wayne, poor bastard, is still stuck in customs and it is no easier for him to get in the UK than it was before. It seems our sacrifice was in vain.

Countries that are close tend to have more liberal immigration between them because it is practical to do so, especially if it is a land border. FoM is simply one contractual manifestation of this. Another is more relaxed VISA requirements. If we negotiate relaxed or no VISA requirements with Spain is this racist if we do not do the same with an African or Asian country? No. It is simply putting in place a contractual and reciprocal agreement between two countries in close proximity. Australia and New Zealand have FoM between them because of location and cultural ties. African countries are establishing their version of the EU with FoM, Single Market and common currency. Are they being racist by not including the UK? No. Again shared borders, regionalisation, pooling resources including labour are the driving forces.

The elimination of borders has to start somewhere and it will only start with countries in proximity to each other. We ourselves, a union of nations, are an example of that. Establish enough blocs with FoM then you are on the way to making it more worldwide. Regressing back to borders is just that. Regression. Trying to justify this regression as ‘fighting racism’ is profoundly ignorant and has the opposite effect. It feeds racism. It promotes differences.
Click to expand...

Which is a rather long winded way of saying you think that being European should give you easier access to come and live in the UK than you would extend to an African or Asian or anybody who wasn't a member of the European Union.

You are perfectly entitled to that view.

I am perfectly entitled to believe it is vile and discriminatory and has no place in a modern society.

Clearly I think the way I do (that a man's place of birth shouldn't give him better access to our country than another man who happened to be born in a different place) because I am a racist.

Clearly your belief that actually a man who is born "closer" to us absolutely should put him ahead of the African,Asian,Australian etc is because you're...not a racist.

Got it.
 
BobKowalski said:
Your problem is a lack of comprehension not racism. You can’t even grasp that it seems.

Holding a passport from a European country in itself confers no extra rights. A Russian passport is a European passport and your average Russian would have more difficulty entering the UK than Wayne. From next year a British passport will confer no extra rights as they will have been removed. The key is not European. Russia and the UK are European. They key is contracted rights and reciprocated rights.

So being European means nothing in itself. We are European and have opted out of the contract that gave us those extra rights. Your average Frenchman still retains these extra contractual rights. The only difference is the number of countries he can exercise these rights in is now 29 and not 30. We on the other hand went from 30 to 1, being the RoI. And Wayne, poor bastard, is still stuck in customs and it is no easier for him to get in the UK than it was before. It seems our sacrifice was in vain.

Countries that are close tend to have more liberal immigration between them because it is practical to do so, especially if it is a land border. FoM is simply one contractual manifestation of this. Another is more relaxed VISA requirements. If we negotiate relaxed or no VISA requirements with Spain is this racist if we do not do the same with an African or Asian country? No. It is simply putting in place a contractual and reciprocal agreement between two countries in close proximity. Australia and New Zealand have FoM between them because of location and cultural ties. African countries are establishing their version of the EU with FoM, Single Market and common currency. Are they being racist by not including the UK? No. Again shared borders, regionalisation, pooling resources including labour are the driving forces.

The elimination of borders has to start somewhere and it will only start with countries in proximity to each other. We ourselves, a union of nations, are an example of that. Establish enough blocs with FoM then you are on the way to making it more worldwide. Regressing back to borders is just that. Regression. Trying to justify this regression as ‘fighting racism’ is profoundly ignorant and has the opposite effect. It feeds racism. It promotes differences.
Click to expand...

Perhaps we could rename as Zaire?

FOM is frequently applied to trade deals. We'll find that out as we negotiate on our own in the coming months.

Safety in numbers creates strength. We’ve thrown that out so that we can make our own deals nor have to the adhere to the new tax haven laws coming in.

Time will tell as to how successful that is. I suspect not as successful as 52% of our voting population in 2016 think.

it’s conjecture on both sides at the moment. One side overestimates the British hand; the other underestimates it.

the EU economy as a whole is bigger than ours. They have more wriggle room to offset the damage caused By Brexit to them than we do here.

That’s before factoring in the pandemic.
 
Kazzydeyna said:
Which is a rather long winded way of saying you think that being European should give you easier access to come and live in the UK than you would extend to an African or Asian or anybody who wasn't a member of the European Union.

You are perfectly entitled to that view.

I am perfectly entitled to believe it is vile and discriminatory and has no place in a modern society.

Clearly I think the way I do (that a man's place of birth shouldn't give him better access to our country than another man who happened to be born in a different place) because I am a racist.

Clearly your belief that actually a man who is born "closer" to us absolutely should put him ahead of the African,Asian,Australian etc is because you're...not a racist.

Got it.
Click to expand...
I don’t think you have quite got it actually.

The UK has various arrangements with every country in the world. US citizens have different visa requirements than Chinese citizens. Australian citizens have different arrangements than Indians. The arrangements we have just given up with the EU are just another set of criteria. Your making out there’s two criteria - EU and non EU. In fact there’s dozens with different countries. Binning off our reciprocal arrangements with the EU doesn’t change the fact that ease of entry to the UK is different for different countries. There is still easier access for some countries compared to others. We’ve achieved nothing except made it more difficult for EU citizens living in the UK and Brits living in the EU.
 
Last edited:
Kazzydeyna said:
Which is a rather long winded way of saying you think that being European should give you easier access to come and live in the UK than you would extend to an African or Asian or anybody who wasn't a member of the European Union.

You are perfectly entitled to that view.

I am perfectly entitled to believe it is vile and discriminatory and has no place in a modern society.

Clearly I think the way I do (that a man's place of birth shouldn't give him better access to our country than another man who happened to be born in a different place) because I am a racist.

Clearly your belief that actually a man who is born "closer" to us absolutely should put him ahead of the African,Asian,Australian etc is because you're...not a racist.

Got it.
Click to expand...

I still don't think you understand what everybody is saying.

Just because we are no longer a part of the EU doesn't make it any easier for people from other countries to access our country.

Heck, take the NHS as an example; after the workers of British nationality, the top 2 nationalities in the NHS are Indian and Filipino. In fact amongst the top 15 nationalities there are also Nigerian, Pakistani, Zimbabwean, Ghanaian and Malaysian workers. None of which are EU countries, yet still managed to come and work here because of agreements made with said countries.

(source: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-7783/#:~:text=The majority of NHS staff,200 different non-British nationalities.)

So it's not about EU and non-EU its about having arrangements with specific countries, we could have stayed in the EU and still arranged this.

In fact 6 of those non-eu countries are commonwealth countries which gives them an advantage to come and work in the UK. I assume that's not fair under your rules/view.
 
Last edited:
gordondaviesmoustache said:
I’ve noticed this thread sparking into life lately.

Any new additions to the cast?
Click to expand...
Not really. If you go onto profiles and have a gander at posting histories there are a couple that have not made a football related post for quite a while. Not for me to say they are obsessed, have mental issues, or would be better served by a politics form - that's for them to decide.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
Not really. If you go onto profiles and have a gander at posting histories there are a couple that have not made a football related post for quite a while. Not for me to say they are obsessed, have mental issues, or would be better served by a politics form - that's for them to decide.
Click to expand...

What is football?
 
BlueAnorak said:
Barnier isnt exactly a truth teller is he. He's a politician for a start so by definition so he'd sell his mother/wife/daughter/son/pet (delete as appropriate) if the political gains were sufficient.

Barnier: We can only give you Canada.
...
Boris: I'd like Canada please.
Barnier: Sorry we can't give you a Canada type deal - You're too close to the EU. You have to have something that fully matches our view of the PD.
Boris: OK you want a better deal then. Talk it over with David Frost.
Frost: Michel old chap, you do know there is no more loss of sovereignty from the UK to the EU?
Barnier: The ECJ must have the final say.
Frost & Boris: !?!?
Click to expand...
Barnier was always expecting a Canada style deal to take years to negotiate.

I'll leave to Bob the detail of who wants what but if the EU is playing hard ball - or even going back on what was on offer - two conclusions seem possible.

Either (thinking of how hard it was to get CETA past all the EU members' parliaments and even regional assemblies) Barnier knows how difficult that might be if Britain can't be trusted

or he senses desperation.

At its crudest, I fear the EU is now calculating that No Deal will be so damaging to the UK economy that - despite the lesser damage to the EU - the damage to the UK economy may ultimately be to the benefit of the EU, as international businesses relocate and the loss of growth in the UK simply transfers as growth in the EU, and in the end far outweighs our net contributions. After all, the government's own calculations have already demonstrated the net economic benefit of EU membership, way more than our membership dues.
 
@Ric should ban all major posters from this thread for a week to give everyone a rest and save the rest from having to read our regurgitated shite constantly.

A short mental health break will be good for us all.
 
hgblue said:
But us Leavers have been constantly lectured that the EU held all the cards and when push came to shove we would have to give in to their demands or be crushed like an ant. I’ve disputed this narrative from the start and was forced to watch on as May and Robbins dutifully bowed down and fulfilled that prediction. Now we have a negotiating team who appear to know what they are doing and we will find out of the EU really do hold all the aces. Let’s just see how this pans out because I suspect they will blink first.
Click to expand...
Frost looks like he is what is required, a professional. He can't make policy though and its Johnson or Gove that need to draw the lines and relax them. So despite the veneer of competence, at the heart we still have these clowns.
I predict both sides will give something. The press is predicting Johnson accepting tariffs on agri goods (Torys were always very supportive of farmers). I think the EU has plenty wriggle room within governance and LPF. Then there is fishing....which is fucked and needs rebuilt from the ground up with or without the EU.
There is a deal to be made, I suspect Johnson would prefer not to have one and play the blame game again.
 
Saddleworth2 said:
Does 'major' mean those that post most or those that actually have something to say?
Click to expand...

You know what it meant but if it makes it easier for you all, just ban anyone advocating leave/brexit.

At least Vics post about fish and Iceland and Bobs about FOM will have a receptive audience.
 
blueinsa said:
@Ric should ban all major posters from this thread for a week to give everyone a rest and save the rest from having to read our regurgitated shite constantly.

A short mental health break will be good for us all.
Click to expand...
Just stop regurgitating shite. Or at least come up with new shite.
 
blueinsa said:
You know what it meant but if it makes it easier for you all, just ban anyone advocating leave/brexit.

At least Vics post about fish and Iceland and Bobs about FOM will have a receptive audience.
Click to expand...
A receptive audience would want to discuss fish farming finance and factories.

I'm quite content if the thread were left to those of us who think No Deal will be disastrous, without those who still have to remind us that they won, or don't really care about negotiations now as they've abdicated the whole thing to elected liars aka the Frost fan club, or see losing an argument as an insult and brilliant debating points as "snide", or think the EU is a white supremacists' wet dream.

Getting past the froth and pointless posts seems more difficult and I assume now it is just leavers' wrecking tactics.

Maybe it's time for Vic and Bob's sensible thread about Brexit negotiations.
 
blueinsa said:
@Ric should ban all major posters from this thread for a week to give everyone a rest and save the rest from having to read our regurgitated shite constantly.

A short mental health break will be good for us all.
Click to expand...

Or you could just give it a miss for a few days there is nothing new to be said

blueinsa said:
Says Mr Fish and Mr Iceland.

On that i am out. Its the weekend, enjoy the thread.
Click to expand...

Have a nice weekend
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top