UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
To the British the single market is simply a place to trade. To the
Europeans, however, the single market is a way to achieve ever greater
union. Many Brits have no idea how our European neighbours think about
it.


Rather says it all that you split the EU into the UK and everyone else. As
if every other country in the EU was united against a common enemy - the
UK.

The reality is EU members, of course, all have differing views of how
things should be done for the best.

I've never seen what the disadvantages are of having a degree of common
standards and objectives.

--
*If I throw a stick, will you leave?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #2   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,300
Default Emergence of Re-leavers


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
To the British the single market is simply a place to trade. To the
Europeans, however, the single market is a way to achieve ever greater
union. Many Brits have no idea how our European neighbours think about
it.


Rather says it all that you split the EU into the UK and everyone else. As
if every other country in the EU was united against a common enemy - the
UK.

The reality is EU members, of course, all have differing views of how
things should be done for the best.

I've never seen what the disadvantages are of having a degree of common
standards and objectives.


Just for us simple plebs, what's the view like from up there, Dave?


  #3   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 17/05/2017 23:55, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:


To the British the single market is simply a place to trade. To the
Europeans, however, the single market is a way to achieve ever greater
union. Many Brits have no idea how our European neighbours think about
it.


Rather says it all that you split the EU into the UK and everyone else. As
if every other country in the EU was united against a common enemy - the
UK.


You may have read that. I didn't write it. I was contrasting the UK view
with the "weighted average" view of the rest.


The reality is EU members, of course, all have differing views of how
things should be done for the best.

I've never seen what the disadvantages are of having a degree of common
standards and objectives.


They are fine if you agree with them, but constraining and limiting if
you do not.


--
James Harris

  #4   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 18/05/2017 16:11, James Harris wrote:
On 17/05/2017 23:55, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:


To the British the single market is simply a place to trade. To the
Europeans, however, the single market is a way to achieve ever greater
union. Many Brits have no idea how our European neighbours think about
it.


Rather says it all that you split the EU into the UK and everyone
else. As
if every other country in the EU was united against a common enemy - the
UK.


You may have read that. I didn't write it. I was contrasting the UK view
with the "weighted average" view of the rest.


By "weighted" average I mean that some countries have much more
influence than others.



The reality is EU members, of course, all have differing views of how
things should be done for the best.

I've never seen what the disadvantages are of having a degree of common
standards and objectives.


They are fine if you agree with them, but constraining and limiting if
you do not.


Oh, and common EU standards can focus on minutiae and become incredibly
hard to change. I head recently that Nick Clegg said the EU took 15
years to decide on the definition of chocolate.

https://youtu.be/mfRlIAiHRhI

And the top levels of the British government - PM and Chancellor - had
to get involved in trying to persuade the EU to let the UK remove VAT
from tampons. I don't think they ever succeeded. But it's good to know
that our top officials are not wasting time on trivia. ;-)

EU rules become an edifice, a trap.


--
James Harris

  #5   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
On 17/05/2017 23:55, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:


To the British the single market is simply a place to trade. To the
Europeans, however, the single market is a way to achieve ever greater
union. Many Brits have no idea how our European neighbours think about
it.


Rather says it all that you split the EU into the UK and everyone
else. As if every other country in the EU was united against a common
enemy - the UK.


You may have read that. I didn't write it. I was contrasting the UK view
with the "weighted average" view of the rest.


You're falling into the trap of speaking for all the UK. As well as the EU
too. Plenty in the Uk liked the idea of a closer alliance with our friends
in Europe. And dislike the fad of presenting them as foes.


The reality is EU members, of course, all have differing views of how
things should be done for the best.

I've never seen what the disadvantages are of having a degree of common
standards and objectives.


They are fine if you agree with them, but constraining and limiting if
you do not.


I keep on asking just which did anything in the way of 'limiting'. And so
far have had very little concrete information.

--
*I must always remember that I'm unique, just like everyone else. *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.


  #6   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I've never seen what the disadvantages are of having a degree of common
standards and objectives.


They are fine if you agree with them, but constraining and limiting if
you do not.


Oh, and common EU standards can focus on minutiae and become incredibly
hard to change. I head recently that Nick Clegg said the EU took 15
years to decide on the definition of chocolate.


https://youtu.be/mfRlIAiHRhI


And that really is such an important thing that you're happy to ruin the
economy over?

And the top levels of the British government - PM and Chancellor - had
to get involved in trying to persuade the EU to let the UK remove VAT
from tampons. I don't think they ever succeeded. But it's good to know
that our top officials are not wasting time on trivia. ;-)


Likewise.

EU rules become an edifice, a trap.


I was hoping for something rather more draconian to worry about.

--
*Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #7   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,168
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 18/05/2017 19:14, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:



You may have read that. I didn't write it. I was contrasting the UK view
with the "weighted average" view of the rest.


You're falling into the trap of speaking for all the UK. As well as the EU
too. Plenty in the Uk liked the idea of a closer alliance with our friends
in Europe. And dislike the fad of presenting them as foes.


Right wingers always need a foe.
Who are they going to incite hatred for if there is no foe.


  #9   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40,893
Default Emergence of Re-leavers



"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I've never seen what the disadvantages are of having a degree of
common
standards and objectives.

They are fine if you agree with them, but constraining and limiting if
you do not.


Oh, and common EU standards can focus on minutiae and become incredibly
hard to change. I head recently that Nick Clegg said the EU took 15
years to decide on the definition of chocolate.


https://youtu.be/mfRlIAiHRhI


And that really is such an important thing that
you're happy to ruin the economy over?


You havent established that the economy will be ruined.

And the top levels of the British government - PM and Chancellor -
had to get involved in trying to persuade the EU to let the UK remove
VAT from tampons. I don't think they ever succeeded. But it's good
to know that our top officials are not wasting time on trivia. ;-)


Likewise.


Ditto.

EU rules become an edifice, a trap.


I was hoping for something rather more draconian to worry about.


There is plenty of that, like forcing complete freedom of movement
on all countrys in the EU and the euro on all new joiners.

  #10   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40,893
Default Emergence of Re-leavers



"dennis@home" wrote in message
web.com...
On 18/05/2017 19:14, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:



You may have read that. I didn't write it. I was contrasting the UK view
with the "weighted average" view of the rest.


You're falling into the trap of speaking for all the UK. As well as the
EU
too. Plenty in the Uk liked the idea of a closer alliance with our
friends
in Europe. And dislike the fad of presenting them as foes.


Right wingers always need a foe.


Corse no left wingers ever do, eh ?

Who are they going to incite hatred for if there is no foe.


Corse thats never a problem for left wingers, eh ?



  #11   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 18/05/2017 19:17, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I've never seen what the disadvantages are of having a degree of common
standards and objectives.

They are fine if you agree with them, but constraining and limiting if
you do not.


Oh, and common EU standards can focus on minutiae and become incredibly
hard to change. I head recently that Nick Clegg said the EU took 15
years to decide on the definition of chocolate.


https://youtu.be/mfRlIAiHRhI


And that really is such an important thing that you're happy to ruin the
economy over?


The Remain side got it in to their heads that Brexit would "ruin the
economy". And it still sustains them to this day. But where did such a
dire belief come from?


And the top levels of the British government - PM and Chancellor - had
to get involved in trying to persuade the EU to let the UK remove VAT
from tampons. I don't think they ever succeeded. But it's good to know
that our top officials are not wasting time on trivia. ;-)


Likewise.

EU rules become an edifice, a trap.


I was hoping for something rather more draconian to worry about.


No time. The EU is too busy worrying about tampons, chocolate, and what
a Jaffa cake is. ;-) All while shuffling unnecessarily between Brussels
and Strasbourg 12 times a year on our money. Duck houses and moats pale
into insignificance.


--
James Harris

  #12   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,556
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article , James Harris
writes
On 18/05/2017 19:17, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I've never seen what the disadvantages are of having a degree of common
standards and objectives.

They are fine if you agree with them, but constraining and limiting if
you do not.


Oh, and common EU standards can focus on minutiae and become incredibly
hard to change. I head recently that Nick Clegg said the EU took 15
years to decide on the definition of chocolate.


https://youtu.be/mfRlIAiHRhI


And that really is such an important thing that you're happy to ruin the
economy over?

Experts dear boy, experts
snip
--
bert
  #13   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 18/05/2017 19:14, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
On 17/05/2017 23:55, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:


To the British the single market is simply a place to trade. To the
Europeans, however, the single market is a way to achieve ever greater
union. Many Brits have no idea how our European neighbours think about
it.

Rather says it all that you split the EU into the UK and everyone
else. As if every other country in the EU was united against a common
enemy - the UK.


You may have read that. I didn't write it. I was contrasting the UK view
with the "weighted average" view of the rest.


You're falling into the trap of speaking for all the UK. As well as the EU
too. Plenty in the Uk liked the idea of a closer alliance with our friends
in Europe. And dislike the fad of presenting them as foes.


I didn't. It was YOU who brought animosity into the discussion. Europe
is a beautiful place. And the people of Europe are our friends and
neighbours.



The reality is EU members, of course, all have differing views of how
things should be done for the best.

I've never seen what the disadvantages are of having a degree of common
standards and objectives.


They are fine if you agree with them, but constraining and limiting if
you do not.


I keep on asking just which did anything in the way of 'limiting'. And so
far have had very little concrete information.


OK. Here are some examples.

We wanted to protect our steel industry from Chinese dumping. But under
EU rules we had to try to persuade them to impose tariffs. They would
only do so if they thought it was good for the average across the EU28.

To protect farmers the EU last year put up tariffs against oranges. We
don't grow oranges in the UK so it helped us not at all. All it did was
put up the prices consumers have to pay in the shops.

The EU decided that it should act as a country and have its own foreign
policy. So it appointed a "high representative" of itself - initially
Cathy Ashton, now Federica Mogherini.

Over-regulation is a dream for big companies as it helps them defeat
smaller competitors. Brussels is a lobbyists paradise but it stifles
competition.

The EU is large but it is deathly _slow_ at making trade deals. It has
missed growing parts of the world. We have missed their growth because
we have not been allowed to cut our own deals. We are already poorer
than we should be as a result. Why is it slow? Two reasons: (1) It is a
committee of 28 nations and tries to suit them all. (2) Those who do the
negotiation are indolent and unaccountable. If they don't do a good job
they are still paid, they still eat and drink well, they know they are
accumulating gold-plated pensions, and they know that they will not be
held to account by the public.

Etc.

--
James Harris

  #14   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
You're falling into the trap of speaking for all the UK. As well as the
EU too. Plenty in the Uk liked the idea of a closer alliance with our
friends in Europe. And dislike the fad of presenting them as foes.


Friends is the word. However, we don't want to be married to them.
Well, not in the political sense. My brother married a French woman and
my sister married the son of a Polish refugee.


And the "foes" business exists merely in your fevered imagination.


How come you don't remember what your idol Nige said on the run-up to the
referendum? Or is that simply convenient amnesia?

--
*WHOSE CRUEL IDEA WAS IT FOR THE WORD 'LISP' TO HAVE 'S' IN IT?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #15   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
And that really is such an important thing that you're happy to ruin the
economy over?


The Remain side got it in to their heads that Brexit would "ruin the
economy". And it still sustains them to this day. But where did such a
dire belief come from?


You've not heard May today? At last has admitted that the future of the UK
relies on a good deal after leaving the EU. Which gives me hope that with
a large majority she will be able to ignore the hardliners in her party.
And all the other UKIP nutcases too.

--
*The longest recorded flightof a chicken is thirteen seconds *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.


  #16   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I didn't. It was YOU who brought animosity into the discussion. Europe
is a beautiful place. And the people of Europe are our friends and
neighbours.


Friends and neighbours you wish to distance yourself from?

--
*I'm not your type. I'm not inflatable.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #17   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I keep on asking just which did anything in the way of 'limiting'. And so
far have had very little concrete information.


OK. Here are some examples.


We wanted to protect our steel industry from Chinese dumping. But under
EU rules we had to try to persuade them to impose tariffs. They would
only do so if they thought it was good for the average across the EU28.


The Chinese dumping steel is good for just what EU country? Germany?
Italy?

To protect farmers the EU last year put up tariffs against oranges. We
don't grow oranges in the UK so it helped us not at all. All it did was
put up the prices consumers have to pay in the shops.


OK. So the EU can't do anything to protect industries in other EU
countries. But you expect it to protect UK steel.

The EU decided that it should act as a country and have its own foreign
policy. So it appointed a "high representative" of itself - initially
Cathy Ashton, now Federica Mogherini.


And?

Over-regulation is a dream for big companies as it helps them defeat
smaller competitors. Brussels is a lobbyists paradise but it stifles
competition.


And us leaving will help that in just what way? Will that stop the EU
regulating companies? But odd that Germany seems to do OK with all that
regulation.

The EU is large but it is deathly _slow_ at making trade deals. It has
missed growing parts of the world. We have missed their growth because
we have not been allowed to cut our own deals. We are already poorer
than we should be as a result. Why is it slow? Two reasons: (1) It is a
committee of 28 nations and tries to suit them all. (2) Those who do the
negotiation are indolent and unaccountable. If they don't do a good job
they are still paid, they still eat and drink well, they know they are
accumulating gold-plated pensions, and they know that they will not be
held to account by the public.


Right. So now we are free to make deals with all those other countries.
But in the process cut ourselves off from the largest single market in the
world. So let's hear about those countries large enough to replace that
lost trade in goods and services.

--
*Why do the two "sanction"s (noun and verb) mean opposites?*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #18   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,300
Default Emergence of Re-leavers


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
And that really is such an important thing that you're happy to ruin
the
economy over?


The Remain side got it in to their heads that Brexit would "ruin the
economy". And it still sustains them to this day. But where did such a
dire belief come from?


You've not heard May today? At last has admitted that the future of the UK
relies on a good deal after leaving the EU. Which gives me hope that with
a large majority she will be able to ignore the hardliners in her party.
And all the other UKIP nutcases too.


I doubt she'll get a large majority. She's shot herself in the foot with the
triple lock and social care for a start.
Also this £100k malarkey and heating allowance.
I actually thought the tories had a few brain cells, seems not and they're
just as stupid as labour.
As I keep saying, Dave, Brexit won't happen.


  #19   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40,893
Default Emergence of Re-leavers



"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
And that really is such an important thing that you're happy to ruin
the
economy over?


The Remain side got it in to their heads that Brexit would "ruin the
economy". And it still sustains them to this day. But where did such a
dire belief come from?


You've not heard May today? At last has admitted that the
future of the UK relies on a good deal after leaving the EU.


She said nothing of the sort.

Which gives me hope that with a large majority she
will be able to ignore the hardliners in her party.


Corse she will, but she was always going to do that.

And all the other UKIP nutcases too.


Even sillier than you usually manage.

She said BRexit is BRexit and that wont change, you watch.

  #20   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40,893
Default Emergence of Re-leavers



"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I didn't. It was YOU who brought animosity into the discussion. Europe
is a beautiful place. And the people of Europe are our friends and
neighbours.


Friends and neighbours you wish to distance yourself from?


Nope, just be selective about which of them can
move to Britain if they decide their prospects are
better in Britain than where they are coming from,.
and not let them decide what British policy is.

Just like Britain should have no say on EU policy either.



  #21   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40,893
Default Emergence of Re-leavers



"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I keep on asking just which did anything in the way of 'limiting'. And
so
far have had very little concrete information.


OK. Here are some examples.


We wanted to protect our steel industry from Chinese dumping. But under
EU rules we had to try to persuade them to impose tariffs. They would
only do so if they thought it was good for the average across the EU28.


The Chinese dumping steel is good for just what EU country?


Those that don’t produce any steel, stupid.

Germany? Italy?

To protect farmers the EU last year put up tariffs against oranges.
We don't grow oranges in the UK so it helped us not at all. All it
did was put up the prices consumers have to pay in the shops.


OK. So the EU can't do anything to protect industries in
other EU countries. But you expect it to protect UK steel.


It can do what it likes once out of the EU, stupid.

The EU decided that it should act as a country and have its
own foreign policy. So it appointed a "high representative"
of itself - initially Cathy Ashton, now Federica Mogherini.


And?


They ****ed that up, as always.

Over-regulation is a dream for big companies as it
helps them defeat smaller competitors. Brussels is
a lobbyists paradise but it stifles competition.


And us leaving will help that in just what way?


No need to over regulate in Britain anymore, stupid.

Will that stop the EU regulating companies?


Doesn’t matter what they do.

But odd that Germany seems to do OK with all that regulation.


Because the demise of the euro means they have an effective massive
devaluation.

And even you should have noticed what happened to VW regulation wise.

The EU is large but it is deathly _slow_ at making trade deals. It has
missed growing parts of the world. We have missed their growth because
we have not been allowed to cut our own deals. We are already poorer
than we should be as a result. Why is it slow? Two reasons: (1) It is a
committee of 28 nations and tries to suit them all. (2) Those who do the
negotiation are indolent and unaccountable. If they don't do a good job
they are still paid, they still eat and drink well, they know they are
accumulating gold-plated pensions, and they know that they will not be
held to account by the public.


Right. So now we are free to make deals with all those other countries.


Yes.

But in the process cut ourselves off from the largest single market in the
world.


Nope, Britain will be free to continue to trade with the EU, just like all
of China, USA, Canada, Japan, Korea, Australia, NZ etc etc etc all do now.

So let's hear about those countries large enough
to replace that lost trade in goods and services.


You havent established that any trade will be lost, liar.

  #22   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39,563
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 18/05/17 22:12, James Harris wrote:
The Remain side got it in to their heads that Brexit would "ruin the
economy". And it still sustains them to this day. But where did such a
dire belief come from?


The EU/Globalist propaganda machine put it there.

Globalism means only one universal narrative to get the sheeple to
believe in.

They talk diversity, but they implement monoculture.


--
€œSome people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
a car with the cramped public exposure of €¨an airplane.€

Dennis Miller

  #23   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39,563
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 19/05/17 01:16, bm wrote:
As I keep saying, Dave, Brexit won't happen.

Bless!

--
€œSome people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
a car with the cramped public exposure of €¨an airplane.€

Dennis Miller

  #24   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,168
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 19/05/2017 00:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I didn't. It was YOU who brought animosity into the discussion. Europe
is a beautiful place. And the people of Europe are our friends and
neighbours.


Friends and neighbours you wish to distance yourself from?


You may have noticed that all the brexitters think we will be free to do
what we like in Europe after brexit but that the EU won't be in the UK.
They appear to be very optimistic. Maybe that's the big difference, some
people are over optimistic?
  #25   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 19/05/2017 00:40, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
And that really is such an important thing that you're happy to ruin the
economy over?


The Remain side got it in to their heads that Brexit would "ruin the
economy". And it still sustains them to this day. But where did such a
dire belief come from?


You've not heard May today? At last has admitted that the future of the UK
relies on a good deal after leaving the EU. Which gives me hope that with
a large majority she will be able to ignore the hardliners in her party.
And all the other UKIP nutcases too.


Just to check, where did your belief come from before today? You didn't
just see cause for alarm.

As for May, what she predicts is not gospel. Let's get that straight
first of all. She was a Remainer and still has never said that Brexit
will be better, albeit that she has accepted the result and seeks to
make the best of it.

As for the deal, there are three broad outcomes

1. A negotiated trade agreement
2. A decision to go to WTO trade
3. An acrimonious breakdown of talks

Only option 3 is "crashing out" of the EU.

Option 2 is what the EU propose (so is achievable). It is not as good as
option 1 but it is not too bad, especially since the EU accepts that
they and we would want a phased implementation.

Far worse than option 2 would be the UK accepting a punitive deal. And I
guess that's what May was warning about. She says she simply will not
accept such a deal from the EU, preferring to go to option 2 rather than
a bad option 1.


--
James Harris



  #26   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 19/05/2017 01:16, bm wrote:

....

As I keep saying, Dave, Brexit won't happen.


Have you been on this journey?

"Brits will never vote to leave the EU"
"Article 50 will never be triggered"
"Brexit won't happen"


--
James Harris

  #27   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 19/05/2017 07:25, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 18/05/17 22:12, James Harris wrote:
The Remain side got it in to their heads that Brexit would "ruin the
economy". And it still sustains them to this day. But where did such a
dire belief come from?


The EU/Globalist propaganda machine put it there.


They certainly caught the media with propagandist terms such as "hard
Brexit". The term went everywhere and entered common parlance even
though it is designed to influence opinion.


Globalism means only one universal narrative to get the sheeple to
believe in.

They talk diversity, but they implement monoculture.




--
James Harris

  #28   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 40,893
Default Emergence of Re-leavers



"dennis@home" wrote in message
eb.com...
On 19/05/2017 00:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I didn't. It was YOU who brought animosity into the discussion. Europe
is a beautiful place. And the people of Europe are our friends and
neighbours.


Friends and neighbours you wish to distance yourself from?


You may have noticed that all the brexitters think we will be free to do
what we like in Europe after brexit but that the EU won't be in the UK.


More remoaner lies.

They appear to be very optimistic.


Nope, all of the USA, Canada, Japan, China, Korea, Australia,
India, NZ etc etc etc all manage it fine. Why can't Britain ?

Maybe that's the big difference, some people are over optimistic?


Remoaners are overly pessimistic, you watch.

  #29   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 19/05/2017 00:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:


I didn't. It was YOU who brought animosity into the discussion. Europe
is a beautiful place. And the people of Europe are our friends and
neighbours.


Friends and neighbours you wish to distance yourself from?


No, I don't want to get away from them.

I don't want a group of European politicians to be able to overrule the
government that Brits elect, if that's what you mean. But that's not
because they are Europeans. They could be from Mongolia or Timbuktu and
it would make no difference.

I repeat: You are claiming an animosity which is not there.


--
James Harris

  #30   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 19/05/2017 08:57, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/05/2017 00:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I didn't. It was YOU who brought animosity into the discussion. Europe
is a beautiful place. And the people of Europe are our friends and
neighbours.


Friends and neighbours you wish to distance yourself from?


You may have noticed that all the brexitters think we will be free to do
what we like in Europe after brexit


They do? Are you sure?

but that the EU won't be in the UK.
They appear to be very optimistic. Maybe that's the big difference, some
people are over optimistic?



--
James Harris



  #31   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:


In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
You're falling into the trap of speaking for all the UK. As well as
the EU too. Plenty in the Uk liked the idea of a closer alliance
with our friends in Europe. And dislike the fad of presenting them
as foes.


Friends is the word. However, we don't want to be married to them.
Well, not in the political sense. My brother married a French woman
and my sister married the son of a Polish refugee.


And the "foes" business exists merely in your fevered imagination.


How come you don't remember what your idol Nige said on the run-up to
the referendum? Or is that simply convenient amnesia?


Since he's not my idol (rather, yours, it seems), I've no idea what he
said about anything, and neither do I care.


So you are so passionate about leaving the EU without following any of the
arguments pro and con in the run up to the referendum? Figures.

--
*To steal ideas from *one* person is plagiarism; from many, research*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #32   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:


In article ,
James Harris wrote:


The EU decided that it should act as a country and have its own
foreign policy. So it appointed a "high representative" of itself -
initially Cathy Ashton, now Federica Mogherini.


And?


And another £500 million went down the drain to no purpose except to
boost EU bigwigs' egos.


Right. So you don't like an organisation having a policy for anything?

-


--
*Ever stop to think and forget to start again?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #33   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article om,
dennis@home wrote:
On 19/05/2017 00:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I didn't. It was YOU who brought animosity into the discussion. Europe
is a beautiful place. And the people of Europe are our friends and
neighbours.


Friends and neighbours you wish to distance yourself from?


You may have noticed that all the brexitters think we will be free to do
what we like in Europe after brexit but that the EU won't be in the UK.
They appear to be very optimistic. Maybe that's the big difference, some
people are over optimistic?


Most of them - even more so on here - seem to have their heads in the
clouds.

Luckily May, with the very real possibility of a large majority, has now
stated she knows the future of the UK must include an agreement on the
free movement of goods and services between the EU and us, after leaving.
Not surprising since she was a remainer. So expect a deal not a million
miles away from Norway or Switzerland.

--
*Procrastination is the art of keeping up with yesterday.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #34   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
You've not heard May today? At last has admitted that the future of
the UK relies on a good deal after leaving the EU. Which gives me hope
that with a large majority she will be able to ignore the hardliners
in her party. And all the other UKIP nutcases too.


Just to check, where did your belief come from before today? You didn't
just see cause for alarm.


As for May, what she predicts is not gospel. Let's get that straight
first of all.


Plenty took what Farage and his cronies predicted as gospel. And voted on
those promises.


She was a Remainer and still has never said that Brexit
will be better, albeit that she has accepted the result and seeks to
make the best of it.


My guess is the deal we end up with won't be better than before all this
nonsense started. Most likely worse in some ways. But designed to satisfy
those who talk about sovereignty and other such meaningless things.

As for the deal, there are three broad outcomes


1. A negotiated trade agreement
2. A decision to go to WTO trade
3. An acrimonious breakdown of talks


Only option 3 is "crashing out" of the EU.


Which could be done now.

Option 2 is what the EU propose (so is achievable). It is not as good as
option 1 but it is not too bad, especially since the EU accepts that
they and we would want a phased implementation.


How do you think that any different from 2 ?

Far worse than option 2 would be the UK accepting a punitive deal. And I
guess that's what May was warning about. She says she simply will not
accept such a deal from the EU, preferring to go to option 2 rather than
a bad option 1.


Punitive deal is just so much more jargon. There is zero chance of getting
a trade and services deal with the EU without paying for it. And May knows
this.

--
*My wife has a slight impediment in her speech. She stops to breathe.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #35   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 376
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 19/05/2017 00:51, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I keep on asking just which did anything in the way of 'limiting'. And so
far have had very little concrete information.


OK. Here are some examples.


We wanted to protect our steel industry from Chinese dumping. But under
EU rules we had to try to persuade them to impose tariffs. They would
only do so if they thought it was good for the average across the EU28.


The Chinese dumping steel is good for just what EU country? Germany?
Italy?


Countries which don't produce steel will not care as much - if at all -
as those who do. And the EU works as a collective.

In fact, if they consume steel some countries might see dumping as
welcome. Even if not officially, they can still put bureaucratic blocks
in the way.

With its voluminous rulebooks and focus on red tape the EU is an ideal
organ for preventing things happening. It could hardly be better.


To protect farmers the EU last year put up tariffs against oranges. We
don't grow oranges in the UK so it helped us not at all. All it did was
put up the prices consumers have to pay in the shops.


OK. So the EU can't do anything to protect industries in other EU
countries. But you expect it to protect UK steel.


No. I was saying that outside the EU we would be able to choose whether
to protect the steel industry or not. We would not have to go to
Brussels or Strasbourg to try to persuade them to do what's good for
British people and British jobs. We could do that ourselves.

Would it be worth it? Maybe. America slapped on very large tariffs of
100% to 150% (possibly temporarily). We were not allowed to. Think about
that. The elected British government was _not allowed_ to do what it
thought best for Brits, because EU rules take precedence over UK ministers.


The EU decided that it should act as a country and have its own foreign
policy. So it appointed a "high representative" of itself - initially
Cathy Ashton, now Federica Mogherini.


And?


I was illustrating that it is not a trade block. It has a flag, an
anthem, a parliament, a means of taxing people, an armed force - at
least one "battlegroup", and now its own foreign policy. It is becoming
a superstate.


Over-regulation is a dream for big companies as it helps them defeat
smaller competitors. Brussels is a lobbyists paradise but it stifles
competition.


And us leaving will help that in just what way? Will that stop the EU
regulating companies?


As long as the government does the right thing the EU will lose its
ability to regulate British businesses. That should lead to the UK
designing better regulatory systems - e.g. ones which are more liberal
and are better for the economy.

But odd that Germany seems to do OK with all that
regulation.


Germany is helped by two things.

1. The EU has an excellent single market in goods - just what Germany,
with its great reputation for manufacturing goods, needs. (The EU does
not have as good a market in digital or services - which is what we
would want.)

2. All eurozone countries are locked to the same exchange rate. Because
of their relative economies, for Greece the rate is too high. For
Germany it is too low. That makes German exports very competitive on
world markets. (And, unfortunately, at the same time it hurts Greece.)
The net result: Germany gets richer, Greece gets poorer. That is part of
the _design_ of a single currency.


The EU is large but it is deathly _slow_ at making trade deals. It has
missed growing parts of the world. We have missed their growth because
we have not been allowed to cut our own deals. We are already poorer
than we should be as a result. Why is it slow? Two reasons: (1) It is a
committee of 28 nations and tries to suit them all. (2) Those who do the
negotiation are indolent and unaccountable. If they don't do a good job
they are still paid, they still eat and drink well, they know they are
accumulating gold-plated pensions, and they know that they will not be
held to account by the public.


Right. So now we are free to make deals with all those other countries.
But in the process cut ourselves off from the largest single market in the
world.


Not so. America is a larger market than the EU. And when we leave, we
will take a lot of the EU's market with us. We are not just 64 million
people, but compared with much of the EU's 450 million we are far
wealthier on average. That gives us greater spending power. We will
therefore punch well above our weight on trade talks.


So let's hear about those countries large enough to replace that
lost trade in goods and services.


How much EU trade do you expect us to lose? (Bear in mind it will be
reduced, not lost altogether.)


--
James Harris




  #36   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
On 19/05/2017 08:57, dennis@home wrote:
On 19/05/2017 00:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I didn't. It was YOU who brought animosity into the discussion. Europe
is a beautiful place. And the people of Europe are our friends and
neighbours.

Friends and neighbours you wish to distance yourself from?


You may have noticed that all the brexitters think we will be free to
do what we like in Europe after brexit


They do? Are you sure?


You've not heard politician say we can set up deals with those individual
countries in the EU we'd like to after we've left? I have - on several
occasions. And heard the most nonsense about how we could have the current
open border with Eire too, after leaving. How some of these idiots ever
get elected...

but that the EU won't be in the UK. They appear to be very optimistic.
Maybe that's the big difference, some people are over optimistic?


The whole basis of the leave campaign was the gamble we could have our
cake and eat it. Sensible people know gamblers always lose.

--
*Virtual reality is its own reward*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #37   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 39,563
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

On 19/05/17 10:47, James Harris wrote:
On 19/05/2017 00:41, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:


I didn't. It was YOU who brought animosity into the discussion. Europe
is a beautiful place. And the people of Europe are our friends and
neighbours.


Friends and neighbours you wish to distance yourself from?


No, I don't want to get away from them.

I don't want a group of European politicians to be able to overrule the
government that Brits elect, if that's what you mean. But that's not
because they are Europeans. They could be from Mongolia or Timbuktu and
it would make no difference.

I repeat: You are claiming an animosity which is not there.


Love Europe and Europeans. Hate the EU. It's that simple.

The confusions arises from people who have tried to equate the EU with
Europe, its citizens and its many diverse cultures.

The EU never represented the citizens of Europe or their culture.

And only Euro****s„¢ pretended that it did.



--
Gun Control: The law that ensures that only criminals have guns.
  #38   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,300
Default Emergence of Re-leavers


"James Harris" wrote in message
news
On 19/05/2017 01:16, bm wrote:

...

As I keep saying, Dave, Brexit won't happen.


Have you been on this journey?

"Brits will never vote to leave the EU"
"Article 50 will never be triggered"
"Brexit won't happen"


There's many a slip twixt cup and lip.
I wouldn't go flag waving just yet.



  #39   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
On 19/05/2017 00:51, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
James Harris wrote:
I keep on asking just which did anything in the way of 'limiting'.
And so far have had very little concrete information.


OK. Here are some examples.


We wanted to protect our steel industry from Chinese dumping. But
under EU rules we had to try to persuade them to impose tariffs. They
would only do so if they thought it was good for the average across
the EU28.


The Chinese dumping steel is good for just what EU country? Germany?
Italy?


Countries which don't produce steel will not care as much - if at all -
as those who do. And the EU works as a collective.


Odd. You've just said as regard oranges it works for just individual
countries.

In fact, if they consume steel some countries might see dumping as
welcome. Even if not officially, they can still put bureaucratic blocks
in the way.


With its voluminous rulebooks and focus on red tape the EU is an ideal
organ for preventing things happening. It could hardly be better.


So absolutely no different from our government - or any other?


To protect farmers the EU last year put up tariffs against oranges. We
don't grow oranges in the UK so it helped us not at all. All it did was
put up the prices consumers have to pay in the shops.


OK. So the EU can't do anything to protect industries in other EU
countries. But you expect it to protect UK steel.


No. I was saying that outside the EU we would be able to choose whether
to protect the steel industry or not. We would not have to go to
Brussels or Strasbourg to try to persuade them to do what's good for
British people and British jobs. We could do that ourselves.


All that would be fine if we were a self sufficient country. But we're
not. We need to both import and export goods and services to make a
living. Which - evetually - some will come to realise means co-operation
with others. Not just being out for No1.

Would it be worth it? Maybe. America slapped on very large tariffs of
100% to 150% (possibly temporarily). We were not allowed to. Think about
that. The elected British government was _not allowed_ to do what it
thought best for Brits, because EU rules take precedence over UK
ministers.


What's left of our steel industry survives mainly on specialist products.
We've not been competitive on world market for general steel for a long
time. Same as with so much heavy industry. And protection has been shown
simply to not work. You need to find niche markets where you can be
competitive.


The EU decided that it should act as a country and have its own
foreign policy. So it appointed a "high representative" of itself -
initially Cathy Ashton, now Federica Mogherini.


And?


I was illustrating that it is not a trade block. It has a flag, an
anthem, a parliament, a means of taxing people, an armed force - at
least one "battlegroup", and now its own foreign policy. It is becoming
a superstate.


And?


Over-regulation is a dream for big companies as it helps them defeat
smaller competitors. Brussels is a lobbyists paradise but it stifles
competition.


And us leaving will help that in just what way? Will that stop the EU
regulating companies?


As long as the government does the right thing the EU will lose its
ability to regulate British businesses. That should lead to the UK
designing better regulatory systems - e.g. ones which are more liberal
and are better for the economy.


You think the EU would allow the UK to 'dump' products in the EU? Odd the
way that others mustn't do this to the UK - but it would be fine for the
UK to do it to others.

But odd that Germany seems to do OK with all that
regulation.


Germany is helped by two things.


1. The EU has an excellent single market in goods - just what Germany,
with its great reputation for manufacturing goods, needs. (The EU does
not have as good a market in digital or services - which is what we
would want.)


Right. So you think we can pick and choose which bits of the EU would suit
us best as regards trade and services. Can I ask why you think the EU
would be mad enough to allow that?

2. All eurozone countries are locked to the same exchange rate. Because
of their relative economies, for Greece the rate is too high. For
Germany it is too low. That makes German exports very competitive on
world markets. (And, unfortunately, at the same time it hurts Greece.)
The net result: Germany gets richer, Greece gets poorer. That is part of
the _design_ of a single currency.


We are not in the Euro. Does that come as a surprise?


The EU is large but it is deathly _slow_ at making trade deals. It has
missed growing parts of the world. We have missed their growth because
we have not been allowed to cut our own deals. We are already poorer
than we should be as a result. Why is it slow? Two reasons: (1) It is a
committee of 28 nations and tries to suit them all. (2) Those who do the
negotiation are indolent and unaccountable. If they don't do a good job
they are still paid, they still eat and drink well, they know they are
accumulating gold-plated pensions, and they know that they will not be
held to account by the public.


Right. So now we are free to make deals with all those other countries.
But in the process cut ourselves off from the largest single market in the
world.


Not so. America is a larger market than the EU. And when we leave, we
will take a lot of the EU's market with us. We are not just 64 million
people, but compared with much of the EU's 450 million we are far
wealthier on average. That gives us greater spending power. We will
therefore punch well above our weight on trade talks.


Ah - the US answer. Despite Trump telling everyone he wants to bring back
production of near everything to the US. A country - by the way - with
vast natural resources, unlike the UK. So lower costs.


So let's hear about those countries large enough to replace that
lost trade in goods and services.


How much EU trade do you expect us to lose? (Bear in mind it will be
reduced, not lost altogether.)


It's not trade as such that is so important to our economy, but services.

--
*With her marriage she got a new name and a dress.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
  #40   Report Post  
Posted to uk.d-i-y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 43,017
Default Emergence of Re-leavers

In article ,
James Harris wrote:
As for May, what she predicts is not gospel. Let's get that straight
first of all.


Plenty took what Farage and his cronies predicted as gospel. And voted on
those promises.


But irrelevant to this discussion....


Very relevant. Predictions are what most vote on.

--
*Age is a very high price to pay for maturity.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:18 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"