Another new Brexit thread

[journolud]

Oh - OK

So you are saying that a Biden government is going to agree an FTA with the UK before the next UK GE?

Would that be because it will be right up the priority list?

OK - fair enough to hold your opinions - and to judge that the views of others are silly

Forgive me if I retain my view that the Remainers on here that have been banging on for a long time that the USA will not do that under Biden and are now saying the opposite are also being - let's say - a bit silly

I’ve no idea if an agreement will be reached with whoever is in the White House before the next uk election but I’m pretty sure we were told before the referendum that securing trade deals after Brexit would be easy and straightforward. Are you saying that wasn’t true? And even if negotiations are still ongoing in the event of a Labour government in three or four years you think they would rip it up and start again?

I didn’t say your views were silly, I said your question was. No need to play the victim with me

 

[mcfc1632]

I’ve no idea if an agreement will be reached with whoever is in the White House before the next uk election but I’m pretty sure we were told before the referendum that securing trade deals after Brexit would be easy and straightforward. Are you saying that wasn’t true? And even if negotiations are still ongoing in the event of a Labour government in three or four years you think they would rip it up and start again?

I didn’t say your views were silly, I said your question was. No need to play the victim with me

At least you are saying that:

"I’ve no idea if an agreement will be reached with whoever is in the White House before the next uk election....."

Check back - my comments - and my question are to do with the here and now - and the coming 3-4 years and specifically about the recent comments from posters on here that the USA will not enter into a FTA with this government - and yet now they are saying......

Sorry - I will move on as you have dropped into deflection. Why the reference to the pre-referendum campaign. That has absolutely nothing to do with my comments or question

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Er.. what about all the months in Spain?

Are you talking about me again?
This place is full of the fucking Stasi, now you’ve traced my movements over the years, feel free to list them.
I’m not a resident, and have not applied for it.
Do you still have a shit at twenty five past seven?

 

[Vic]

Are you talking about me again?
This place is full of the fucking Stasi, now you’ve traced my movements over the years, feel free to list them.
I’m not a resident, and have not applied for it.
Do you still have a shit at twenty five past seven?

You do seem to have an intimate knowledge of the ex-pat community in Spain, but I thought you'd posted something a few days ago from which it was inferred that you were saying you were eligible for residency and might apply. Put it down to a misunderstanding.

That just leaves mcfc1632 as the only Brexiter on here who's thinking about a route to EU citizenship. The rest of us just have to trawl for Irish ancestors.

 

[Vic]

So the wizard idea for new environmental payments to farmers (replacing subsidies for actually producing food) is that instead of filling in bureaucratic forms they will each get a visit from an agronomist who will walk the farm with the farmer discussing what could be done to qualify for payments for "sustainable farming" (which sounds as vague as "sustainable development" in planning which apparently allows lots of new housing in green belt).

How much will that cost? (Who pays?) Where are all the agronomists? What do they know about animal-rearing rather than crops? If a farmer is already doing what should be done for the environment will this reward farmers who haven't done much so far? Will the good guys hold back on environmental measures until the new scheme rewards them for it?

I apologise in advance to blueinsa for asking inane questions (i.e. questions to which he doesn't know the answer). I can't blame him though. These are just another bunch of Brexit questions to which no-one knows the answer.

 

[blueinsa]

"If we crash out with no deal who will put the sugar on my cornflakes"?

"What happens to the tin of sardines in my cupboard overnight on the 31st December"?

"I was planning on spending New Years Day with my family....will this still be possible out of the EU"?

"I'm scared will someone please help"?

 

[journolud]

At least you are saying that:

"I’ve no idea if an agreement will be reached with whoever is in the White House before the next uk election....."

Check back - my comments - and my question are to do with the here and now - and the coming 3-4 years and specifically about the recent comments from posters on here that the USA will not enter into a FTA with this government - and yet now they are saying......

Sorry - I will move on as you have dropped into deflection. Why the reference to the pre-referendum campaign. That has absolutely nothing to do with my comments or question

Deflection? Hardly, I’ve tried to engage you on the points. If you can’t see there is a contradiction between what we were told in the referendum campaign about the ease with which post Brexit deals will be done and the comments you make now about dealing with (an assumed) Biden administration then fair enough. I’ll take it as a tacit agreement that we were misled. But yes it is a different discussion, that tends to be how things evolve.

I already suggested that the doubts about whether a trade deal with the US could be struck appeared to be tied to a degree to the fidelity to the GFA, this not based on comments from “posters on here” but the words of actual American politicians who might have a say. Do you think that risk is real or is it all just posturing by Biden, Pelosi er al?

You’re so determined to expose the apparent hypocrisy of “posters” that you fail to engage with the substance.

Believing that there is a threat to a potential trade deal doesn’t preclude speculating on what an actual trade deal might look like. It’s perfectly possible to think in more than one direction

 

[Vic]

Deflection? Hardly, I’ve tried to engage you on the points. If you can’t see there is a contradiction between what we were told in the referendum campaign about the ease with which post Brexit deals will be done and the comments you make now about dealing with (an assumed) Biden administration then fair enough. I’ll take it as a tacit agreement that we were misled. But yes it is a different discussion, that tends to be how things evolve.

I already suggested that the doubts about whether a trade deal with the US could be struck appeared to be tied to a degree to the fidelity to the GFA, this not based on comments from “posters on here” but the words of actual American politicians who might have a say. Do you think that risk is real or is it all just posturing by Biden, Pelosi er al?

You’re so determined to expose the apparent hypocrisy of “posters” that you fail to engage with the substance.

Believing that there is a threat to a potential trade deal doesn’t preclude speculating on what an actual trade deal might look like. It’s perfectly possible to think in more than one direction

It's simpler than that. Cummings has backed down on the breaking of international law (but still the Tories are lying that their proposals were to protect the GFA). That's down partly to the outrage including internal opposition, a cabinet split and resignations over it, but partly due to belatedly realising that the Americans think it's the Tories threatening the GFA.

(Somewhere in there must also be a calculation in the USA that any deal with the UK that does allow lower standard food exports to the UK might make it more difficult to resurrect TTIP, but at the moment it seems the Americans will not want to comply with our current standards.)

 

[mcfc1632]

Deflection? Hardly, I’ve tried to engage you on the points. If you can’t see there is a contradiction between what we were told in the referendum campaign about the ease with which post Brexit deals will be done and the comments you make now about dealing with (an assumed) Biden administration then fair enough. I’ll take it as a tacit agreement that we were misled. But yes it is a different discussion, that tends to be how things evolve.

I already suggested that the doubts about whether a trade deal with the US could be struck appeared to be tied to a degree to the fidelity to the GFA, this not based on comments from “posters on here” but the words of actual American politicians who might have a say. Do you think that risk is real or is it all just posturing by Biden, Pelosi er al?

You’re so determined to expose the apparent hypocrisy of “posters” that you fail to engage with the substance.

Believing that there is a threat to a potential trade deal doesn’t preclude speculating on what an actual trade deal might look like. It’s perfectly possible to think in more than one direction

Sorry - yes deflection and pretty straightforward - comments about pre-referendum campaign claims have absolutely nothing to do with my posts.

My question and comments were highlighting the hypocrisy of those that are just desperate to pour scorn on all things Brexit that they have no awareness of how they demonstrate how inconsistent and confused they are.

Quite simple really - and if you collate what they say on various threads - they are repeatedly self-contradictory

And anyway - back on 'points' - you seem to be agreeing with me. You agree that there is doubts about the conclusion of a TA with the USA if Biden / Pelosi are making the decisions - and that seems to be nailed on.

I would say that those are not simply doubts - but grave doubts - in fact there is little chance of such an agreement between now and the next GE.

So - indeed - my question was very relevant - and it cut through the bollocks of those other posters (my question and comments were not aimed at you)

But anyway - I have no interest in silly stuff. I have raised my question and made my points - and explained the thinking behind them - so that will do for me.

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

It's simpler than that. Cummings has backed down on the breaking of international law (but still the Tories are lying that their proposals were to protect the GFA). That's down partly to the outrage including internal opposition, a cabinet split and resignations over it, but partly due to belatedly realising that the Americans think it's the Tories threatening the GFA.

(Somewhere in there must also be a calculation in the USA that any deal with the UK that does allow lower standard food exports to the UK might make it more difficult to resurrect TTIP, but at the moment it seems the Americans will not want to comply with our current standards.)