Brexit Deal

Wattie said:
Mays deal -diabolical but the Eu want to hang us with it. She has right royally sold the UK down the river.....and any new PM without a majority.
If it’s accepted the UK is finished, vassel state, at the Eu’s whim. No voice no deal, legally strangled
Can we all agree on that. Remainers and leavers. Surely none of us want that?
Click to expand...
Wrong. Many prefer that to the disaster of a no-deal. Never "assume", Wattie...it makes an *** out of u.
 
Happy as ever to capitulate regarding boobs having always being a firm supporter of big tits. I will however take issue over the term ‘thigh gap’, I believe the correct lingo is a ‘bridge’ but personally I prefer ‘box gap’...

57912

A stunning example from LeMans 18
 
jonny said:
Wrong. Many prefer that to the disaster of a no-deal. Never "assume", Wattie...it makes an *** out of u.
Click to expand...
Who’s many...... you and?
I didn’t assume.
I asked a question. “Can we all agree.....?”
Didn’t I?
Maybe you presumed I assumed?

I’d rather remain than accept Mays pathetic deal.

It sounds like you would too- I assume?;)
 
Last edited:
MrMickS said:
The issues with May's deal are overblown by those that are desperate for a no-deal exit. They want to ensure that the EU anti-tax avoidance and anti-money laundering measures don't become part of British law. There is no benefit to the EU continuing with the transition period ad-infinitum. It would engender more and more bad feeling if they are seen to be a "bad actor".

None of the other propositions have come up with realistic ways to manage the customs issue, in particular with its application to the Irish border. Those proposing the "alternative measures" acknowledge that there is nothing available off the shelf now and it would take 2-3 years to be able to get something in place.

The advantage of May's deal is that it gives us leverage when negotiating deals for after the transition period. The fact that it can be extended removes the desperation from the UK team doing the negotiation. It does give us a measure of control that "no deal" brings. This is coming from someone that would rather we didn't leave at all.

Yes, the deal does mean us taking from the EU without influence. That's going to be the way going forward anyway. In any deal with the EU post Brexit we will have to ensure that our standards at least match up to the EU ones. That's a given. However with no deal will be forced to take from everyone else as well as the EU. Its the lesser of two evils.

A no deal exit would be much more damaging than people are willing to admit. It would remove any pretence that this is about "taking back control" as trading under WTO type tariffs would cripple exports vs countries with deals with whoever we trade with. Countries would know this and take the opportunity to push for much worse deals than we would ordinarily get.
Click to expand...
You’ve raised some very good points- all of which i’ll Ignore.

I’d like to take issue with the fact that you claim “those that are desperate for a no-deal exit. They want to ensure that the EU anti-tax avoidance and anti-money laundering measures don't become part of British law”

What?
Are you suggesting that we want to be the world’s ML capital and a new tax haven.

HSBC and Jimmy Carr will be delighted at the news.:excellent:
 
A shock report :lol2:
The Eu’s growth.....what growth? :lol2:


Europe faces 1.2m job losses & hit to economy if Britain quits EU with No Deal
EUROPE faces 1.2m job losses and a “disastrous” hit to key sectors of its economy under a No Deal Brexit, a shock report revealed yesterday. Experts have calculated that the EU’s growth will be slashed by 1.54% in the “short term” after Britain leaves without an agreement. Ireland would be the worst hit, shedding 50,330...
https://apple.news/AcIDtmgHQT5yQ7UO80WasYA

Fire up those presses Mario double quick!
 
Last edited:
Wattie said:
You’ve raised some very good points- all of which i’ll Ignore.

I’d like to take issue with the fact that you claim “those that are desperate for a no-deal exit. They want to ensure that the EU anti-tax avoidance and anti-money laundering measures don't become part of British law”

What?
Are you suggesting that we want to be the world’s ML capital and a new tax haven.

HSBC and Jimmy Carr will be delighted at the news.:excellent:
Click to expand...

I'll try and expand on my point though, even though your glib reply suggests that you'll just dismiss it.

Its no secret that the EU are trying to get tough on tax avoidance and money laundering (https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_custo...dance-package/anti-tax-avoidance-directive_en). Its also no secret that over the years the British veto on EU proposals has been deployed to block such measures. However some measures have made it through. This was the driver for the money to back the leave campaign.

We don't need to become a haven of ML and Tax Avoidance. We already are. London is awash with money coming in from abroad. Witness the recent case of the woman that was jailed when they couldn't find where the money came from https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/20...-million-harrods-revealed-wife-jailed-banker/. She is just the tip of the iceberg and called attention to herself.

On the rest of it, its impossible to get a decent debate on someone that supports Brexit because it has the same appeal as a Religion. It defies definition in specific terms, it demands faith over reason, it labels those that oppose it as non-believers that are trying to ruin it. Finally, its controlled by a rich elite who are using it for their own purposes.
 
Well as someone who has been in financial services for 35 years your suggestion that the Uk is not tough on AML is bollox.
Money coming in from abroad is called trade. A very small %might be illegal but for you to suggest otherwise is incorrect.
The amount of paperwork required for any regulated or indeed bank transfer/investment nowadays is ridiculous......everything is checked and double checked. To the point it’s farcical.

HSBC and Jimmy Carr excepted.

AML and tax avoidance opportunities- see my previous posts on Cyprus. The Eu ought to look at home first.

Re the rest of your post
“it demands faith over reason, it labels those that oppose it as non-believers that are trying to ruin it. Finally, its controlled by a rich elite who are using it for their own purposes”

You’ve nailed my problem with the EU.
Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Wattie said:
Well I’d consider Jesus but sadly he’s not available for election.

Anyway, it’s rather funny you question Farages credibility when you said this

“Corbyn, is IMHO, a decent human being. His politics are a bit awry, but he's honest, respects the disadvantaged, understands business needs to thrive but the leitmotif is back to the 70's of the three day week (actually Tories) and mega-powerful unions. Socially he's spot on”

Socially spot on eh..... :lol2: unless you're Jewish apparantly.
Click to expand...
Or fancy invading , I really wouldn't want Corbyn in charge if difficult decisions needed to be made regarding our defence
 
Wack61 said:
Or fancy invading , I really wouldn't want Corbyn in charge if difficult decisions needed to be made regarding our defence
Click to expand...
Other successful Western nations manage with hardly any military. It's that Ole' Empire thinking again.......
 
Are they members of NATO though , expecting the big players to come and sort any problems out without actually buying a round
 
Wack61 said:
Are they members of NATO though , expecting the big players to come and sort any problems out without actually buying a round
Click to expand...
I was think like Denmark, Switzerland, Norway, Iceland?

NATO or not, if anyone tries it on with the newly demilitarised UK, NATO etc will feel the need protect the lines....

Who's gonna threaten us tho? Iceland for Cod? Ireland for, err, ok not Ireland. Russia? Too far. USA, they can fook off...

Like the Westphalian doctrine is now not relevant, perhaps being armed up the teeth is, cos your neighbour will get twitchy about being the next and defend you. This concept will filter down until there are no more armies.

But, having said that, the country with last remaining army will have the whole Monopoly board. Whatever, it won't be us, so let's get rid of our military, weps, Floating Fortresses, and feed some poor people....
 
MrMickS said:
....
On the rest of it, its impossible to get a decent debate on someone that supports Brexit because it has the same appeal as a Religion. It defies definition in specific terms, it demands faith over reason, it labels those that oppose it as non-believers that are trying to ruin it. Finally, its controlled by a rich elite who are using it for their own purposes.
Click to expand...

I think this is a brilliantly put point, and I agree with it completely. However, as Wattie has demonstrated, he feels exactly the same about the EU and those who support it.

This is what is so effing annoying about Brexit and the whole debacle of what should Britain’s relationship be with the European Union. It’s a really depressing truth, and I don’t understand why it is that Brexit has become something that it’s impossible for people to have a reasonable conversation about?

I suspect some of it is down to a total breakdown in trust? Probably also not helped by the reality being very complicated, with lots of nuances. As a result, people tend to oversimplify, or people misunderstand. Layer on a bunch of rich elite w.ankers (on both sides) trying to use it for their own advantage (political and monetary), and it has just become a ******* car crash where all sides are so entrenched they can’t see any way out of their own positions.

I’m off to the pub!.....
 
JonW said:
I think this is a brilliantly put point, and I agree with it completely. However, as Wattie has demonstrated, he feels exactly the same about the EU and those who support it.

This is what is so effing annoying about Brexit and the whole debacle of what should Britain’s relationship be with the European Union. It’s a really depressing truth, and I don’t understand why it is that Brexit has become something that it’s impossible for people to have a reasonable conversation about?

I suspect some of it is down to a total breakdown in trust? Probably also not helped by the reality being very complicated, with lots of nuances. As a result, people tend to oversimplify, or people misunderstand. Layer on a bunch of rich elite w.ankers (on both sides) trying to use it for their own advantage (political and monetary), and it has just become a *** car crash where all sides are so entrenched they can’t see any way out of their own positions.

I’m off to the pub!.....
Click to expand...
It's basically down to this...

1. Some people think the UK is special, empirical, lost glories, not subservient, we stood alone, defeated Hitler.

2. Some people think we are just another country.

If anyone has read any Dostoyevskiy, Crime and Punishment, they can surely see the Raskolnikovian aspects of 1. - he thought he was 'better' than ordinary folk, but was a lowly impoverished student, thought he had the right to kill as he was superior, as in the example of the pawnbroker that fleeced him and her sister, but when he did he felt guilt and paranoia was would anyone. It's this schism that typifies both the novel (indeed raskolnik is Russian for split or more accurately splitter or one who is split) and the UK position in the EU. We are both in and out.

I sound dead clever don't I!?
 
Wattie said:
Well as someone who has been in financial services for 35 years your suggestion that the Uk is not tough on AML is bollox.
Money coming in from abroad is called trade. A very small %might be illegal but for you to suggest otherwise is incorrect.
The amount of paperwork required for any regulated or indeed bank transfer/investment nowadays is ridiculous......everything is checked and double checked. To the point it’s farcical.
Click to expand...

and yet the UK has consistently opposed anti tax avoidance and AML directives coming from the EU. Why would that be?

I think today is a time for Unicorn killing. Let’s take the one that’s always placed as the most important, the “taking back control” Unicorn.

The premise of this is that the UK takes rules from the EU, is subject to the ECJ, and that Brexit will stop this being the case.

Let’s look beyond Brexit and look at future trade deals. If we want to deal then we need to have agreed standards for goods between us and a new partner. We won’t accept their standards blindly and they won’t take ours. Ours will have to be at least as good as there’s. If we trade and goods from us are found deficient that won’t be heard in our courts but in theirs.

This doesn’t just apply to goods either. Human rights of workers enters into it. You can’t exploit your workforce and expect it to be allowed as it places the other party’s companies at a disadvantage.

So in a deal with the EU we would have to meet their standards. Defined by the commission and upheld by the ECJ.

Hang on a minute. How is this different than now, except we won’t have a say in setting the rules?

My objections to Brexit, unlike yours to the EU, aren’t ideological. They are practical. It makes no sense. None of the promises can actually be delivered on unless we are going to seal ourselves off from the world. What is the point of removing ourselves from the process of setting rules when they’ll still apply to our dealings with the EU?
 
Point of order: BSi have always been at the forefront of standards worldwide and remain so, Standards are independent of governments and remain so, BSi & CEN have agreed (2017) that standards are unaffected by Brexit as UK have universally agreed to maintain all existing standards and will remain on WC (working committees) with a full participation and furthermore when most standards are working toward an ISO even CEN become a small fish... One of my roles is as a technical author of standards and committee member!
 
A Perfectly decent civilised protest....considering we could have gone full “Hong Kong” phooey on them.

57998
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top