In article , Mark
writes
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:31:55 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , Mark
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 12:27:00 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , Mark
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 11:05:56 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:

"pamela" wrote in message
.. .
On 19:16 23 Sep 2017, Tim Streater wrote:

In article , pamela
wrote:

The Leavers now need to prove their original claims that it will
be like a picnic with sweets for everybody.

No we don't because there was no such claim. My views are based
on the democratic deficit - that the EU uses a political system
that the UK has spent the last 200 or more years evolving away
from. End of.

The claim was implicit in the breezy assurances given by Brexiteers
both ebfore and after the referendum that the concerns expressed by
Remainers was largely irrelevant and that it would be a cinch to make
alternative arrangements which would be in our favour.

That's no different from the breezy assurance from Remainers that all of
the
EU problems could be resolved by us staying in and changing it from the
inside

Huh! If we remained a part of the EU we would have some say on how it
is run; outside the EU we have no say at all.

And outside the EU we won't care, as those rules won't apply to us.

If we want to trade with EU countries then they will.

Only those which apply to products to be exported to the EU.

There are plenty of those. And many UK-based busineses are likely to
relocate when the UK leaves the EU.

No others
will. UK exporters to all other countries in the world are already in
this position.

So? That's not a good reason to make it harder for existing exporters
to EU countries.

It's also normal for importing countries with specific requirements
(such as for food production), to have their inspectors located in the
exporting country, to continuously verify that the exporter is
producing to the importer's requirements.

And outside the EU this will be more difficult.

I'm not saying this will happen but, outside the EU, the UK may find
new EU rules make it harder to export to the EU, since the UK will no
longer have *any* say in the rules.


The eternal pessimism of the remoaners. Let's think up as many reasons
as we can for things to worry about even though they are likely never to
happen.
--
bert

In article , Mark
writes
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 14:20:54 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , Mark
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:31:55 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , Mark
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 12:27:00 +0100, Tim Streater

And outside the EU we won't care, as those rules won't apply to us.

If we want to trade with EU countries then they will.

Only those which apply to products to be exported to the EU.

There are plenty of those. And many UK-based busineses are likely to
relocate when the UK leaves the EU.

This is merely your opinion.

No. There are many who predicting this and several large companies
have expressed the desire to leave.
Really? All the ones I've read about Google Apple etc are moving in
here. Why would any company express a "desire " to leave. Who's stopping
them? More remoaners fake news.

No others will. UK exporters to all other countries in the world
are already in this position.

So? That's not a good reason to make it harder for existing exporters
to EU countries.

It won't be harder. Those companies are *already* complying with the
relevant regulations.

And, in a short time, we won't have any influence in these
regulations.

It's also normal for importing countries with specific requirements
(such as for food production), to have their inspectors located in the
exporting country, to continuously verify that the exporter is
producing to the importer's requirements.

And outside the EU this will be more difficult.

Another content-free assertion on your part

No. If we no longer have any say on the regulations then it certainly
isn't going to get easier.

I'm not saying this will happen but, outside the EU, the UK may find
new EU rules make it harder to export to the EU, since the UK will no
longer have *any* say in the rules.

If they make it harder for us, they will be making it harder for any
other country that exports that product to the EU. Otherwise they will,
AIUI, be breaking WTO rules.

So you are saying that there won't be preferential treatment for EU
members?

By definition EU member countries don't "export" to the Eu. It's called
the Single Market.
--
bert

In article , Mark
writes
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 14:43:14 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Mark" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 14:20:54 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , Mark
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:31:55 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , Mark
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 12:27:00 +0100, Tim Streater

And outside the EU we won't care, as those rules won't apply to us.

If we want to trade with EU countries then they will.

Only those which apply to products to be exported to the EU.

There are plenty of those. And many UK-based busineses are likely to
relocate when the UK leaves the EU.

This is merely your opinion.

No. There are many who predicting this

OK it's several people's opinion

it still isn't a fact

Nor can it be dismissed so easily.
It just was.

and several large companies
have expressed the desire to leave.

Have threatened to leave as part of a negotiating position - few take that
threat to its final conclusion

Come back when some have actually done so

So you're prepared to gamble on this?

No others will. UK exporters to all other countries in the world
are already in this position.

So? That's not a good reason to make it harder for existing exporters
to EU countries.

It won't be harder. Those companies are *already* complying with the
relevant regulations.

And, in a short time, we won't have any influence in these
regulations.

we wont need to

Why not? Why do you think it would be better to have no influence?

Because remaining in carries a cost which outweighs the perceived
benefit of having 1/28th of a say on those changes we object to.
--
bert

In article , Mark
writes
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 14:49:28 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , tim...
wrote:

"pamela" wrote in message
...
On 11:05 24 Sep 2017, tim... wrote:

"pamela" wrote in message
...
On 19:16 23 Sep 2017, Tim Streater wrote:

In article , pamela
wrote:

The Leavers now need to prove their original claims that it
will be like a picnic with sweets for everybody.

No we don't because there was no such claim. My views are
based on the democratic deficit - that the EU uses a political
system that the UK has spent the last 200 or more years
evolving away from. End of.

The claim was implicit in the breezy assurances given by
Brexiteers both ebfore and after the referendum that the
concerns expressed by Remainers was largely irrelevant and that
it would be a cinch to make alternative arrangements which
would be in our favour.

That's no different from the breezy assurance from Remainers
that all of the EU problems could be resolved by us staying in
and changing it from the inside

Point taken. However British engagement with the processes of the
EU has always been poor. I recall stats which showed the UK as a
country had one of the lowest representations on EU committees and
working groups. (Per capita of population.)

the number of MEPs each county has IS disproportionately biased towards the
smaller countries

I guess this applies to committees too.

Tory MEPs always complained that Kipper MEPs didn't attend or pull
their weight in such committees. AIUI, St Nige was on the Fisheries
Committee and never attended it (or only once).

Yes, the British MEPs didn't take it seriously so they have only
themselves to blame.
And the others take it so seriously they don't turn up for the Sate of
the Union speech as they'd all ****ed off on holiday.
An UKIP MEP is ridiculous - like Turkeys on the
Christmas committee.

The European Parliament is a waste of time anyway. Just listen to one of
their "debates".
--
bert

In article , Andy Burns
writes
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

a public speech at Florence

Anyone know /why/ this is in Florence, if as mentioned, nobody in
particular from .eu is going to be there?


The birthplace of European civilisation - which some on here will claim
didn't exist before the EU.
--
bert

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 18:27:15 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 24/09/17 16:40, Mark wrote:
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:33:48 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 12:00:25 +0100, Mark wrote:

Huh! If we remained a part of the EU we would have some say on how
it is run

Yes, which would be *worthless* because it would be ignored as we've
already seen (unless you're impenetrably dense and unable to see this,
of course).

Ah, so you don't believe in democracy.

Show me any demnocracy in the EU.

Show me any democracy with the Remoaners, too!



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 18:27:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 24/09/17 16:48, Mark wrote:
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:40:13 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:02:03 +0100, Mark wrote:

If we want to trade with EU countries then they will.

They need to trade with us, too.

And who is in the stronger position here?

We are.

We actually hold *all* the cards. It's a pity May seems to be totally
unaware of it, though, the useless bitch.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 21:14:21 +0100, bert wrote:

It's the remainers who are the little Englanders afraid to get out into
the big wide world on their own. They think they can hide behind big
brother.


It's almost as if they suffer from a deep sense of insecurity - probably
arising from a dysfunctional family upbringing. Therefore they need to
feel part of something bigger as some kind of comfort blanket.



--
This message may be freely reproduced without limit or charge only via
the Usenet protocol. Reproduction in whole or part through other
protocols, whether for profit or not, is conditional upon a charge of
GBP10.00 per reproduction. Publication in this manner via non-Usenet
protocols constitutes acceptance of this condition.

"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Andy Burns
writes
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

a public speech at Florence

Anyone know /why/ this is in Florence, if as mentioned, nobody in
particular from .eu is going to be there?


The birthplace of European civilisation

Nope, there was european civilisation long before that.

- which some on here will claim
didn't exist before the EU.
--
bert

On 24/09/17 20:56, bert wrote:
In article , pamela
writes
On 16:14Â* 21 Sep 2017, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Thu, 21 Sep 2017 13:46:47 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Now it seems she wishes to do this via a public speech at
Florence.

A speech the EU isn't going to ....


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-
theresa-may-speech-
florence-eu-commission-michel-barnier-negotiations-divorce-
bill-a7959396.html

No European Commission officials will be travelling to Florence
to attend Theresa May's landmark speech on the Brexit
negotiations, The Independent can reveal, in what appears to be
a snub to the Prime Minister.

The Independent understands that Brussels officials and
negotiators will be staying away from the PM's critical address,
despite chief EU negotiator Michel Barnier already being in
Italy to address local politicians the day before.

In the audience instead will be Ms May's own cabinet ministers
including Boris Johnson, who laid out his own (conflicting)
vision for what Brexit should look like, in a 4,000-word Daily
Telegraph article less than a week ago.


So much for the reassurance often stated by Brexiteers that the EU
needs the UK more than the UK needs the EU.

Of course the UK imports more EU goods than the other way
around.Â* However, the pro-EU states seem prepared to accept this loss
of income if it teaches the lesson that leavers, now and in the
future, will incur a financial cost based on principle not logic.
The EU states are forbidden to make any comment on the negotiations
which are in the hands of the Commission.

But not their newspapers, paid sockpuppets, trade organisations.
individuals inside government, lobby groups, stool pigeons and fifth
columunists and indeed almost everybody *except* official heads of state
talking in an *official capacity*..


--
"If you dont read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
news
On 24/09/17 12:00, Mark wrote:


Huh! If we remained a part of the EU we would have some say on how it
is run; outside the EU we have no say at all.

Bless!

we will have more infludence on the EU by leaving it than we ever had
inside it.

ISTR being the third senior engineer in a row to leave a particular
employment with the reason "manger refuses to delegate any responsibilities
to his senior staff" (whilst at the same time working all hours available
and complaining that he was overworked)

I heard later that soon after I had left the department was reorganised to
provide senior engineers with some responsibility for junior engineers

tim

"Mark" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 14:27:49 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"Mark" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 11:05:56 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:



"pamela" wrote in message
...
On 19:16 23 Sep 2017, Tim Streater wrote:

In article , pamela
wrote:

The Leavers now need to prove their original claims that it will
be like a picnic with sweets for everybody.

No we don't because there was no such claim. My views are based
on the democratic deficit - that the EU uses a political system
that the UK has spent the last 200 or more years evolving away
from. End of.

The claim was implicit in the breezy assurances given by Brexiteers
both ebfore and after the referendum that the concerns expressed by
Remainers was largely irrelevant and that it would be a cinch to make
alternative arrangements which would be in our favour.

That's no different from the breezy assurance from Remainers that all of
the
EU problems could be resolved by us staying in and changing it from the
inside

Huh! If we remained a part of the EU we would have some say on how it
is run; outside the EU we have no say at all.

outside we no longer need to change it

That's a very naive attitude.

um no it's not

tim

"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Mark
writes
On Sat, 23 Sep 2017 13:15:19 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

In article , Mark
wrote:

On Sat, 23 Sep 2017 12:34:59 +0100, Tim Streater
wrote:

Not that this alters the case for leaving one iota.

True. There was never a good case for leaving the EU and even less
now. Delaying jumping off the cliff isn't going to change the
eventual outcome. International confidence in the UK is dropping all
the time and several agencies have downgraded the UK's credit rating
as a result.

The fact that the
EU would do this merely confirms why we should be leaving.

No. EU cohesion is more important than one country who are trying to
leave. The EU recognise how stupid the UK is at the moment. The
little englanders have sold you a dud.

And the UK negociators haven't a clue what they are doing.

Don't be silly. If the EU can only be held together by threats and
bullying then it should be dissolved altogether and new arrangements
made.

Oh dear. You seem to be among those who think the EU should do
exactly what the UK tells it to. The EU has never been a club for the
UK to control. It's about cooperation - which it is not getting much
from the UK now.

No it's a club for the Germans to control. The rest are all afraid of the
Germans.
What we're about to get now is the worst of both "worlds": We'll
still be paying large sums of money to the EU
Only for a couple of years more and even that has conditions attached.
Remember the EU mantra - nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.
but getting nothing back
and having no say over EU rules.

Well we only have 1/28th say at the moment.
The problem is not so much having an EU, it's *this* EU, this *corrupt*
and *undemocratic* EU.

It's no less democratic and corrupt than the UK political system,
better in fact.

And FYI, there aren't any "little englanders", and they haven't sold me
anything; I've known about how unfit for purpose the EU is for many
years.

From your posts you seem to be a "little englander" based on your
prejudices.

It's the remainers who are the little Englanders.

I see that you still haven't learnt to put white space in your posts

tim


--
bert

In article ,
tim... wrote:
Ah - right. You dislike the idea of one country helping another. And
the principle that as that country become richer, it contributes to
others.

no

I dislike the idea of being expected to help the poorer counties in a
club where it is the poor countries that make the rules

Ah - OK. What happened to the EU being run by unelected commissioners?
Does that bit not fit your theory this time?

--
*Always drink upstream from the herd *

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

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 06:10:18 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Mark" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:33:48 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 12:00:25 +0100, Mark wrote:

Huh! If we remained a part of the EU we would have some say on how it
is run

Yes, which would be *worthless* because it would be ignored as we've
already seen (unless you're impenetrably dense and unable to see this, of
course).

Ah, so you don't believe in democracy.

You clearly don't. A majority of those who bothered to
vote decided that they wanted Britain to leave the EU.

Oh dear. It's ironic that Brexiters cry about democracy when
referring to the referendum vote but conveniently forget about
democracy when it doesn't give them the result they wanted.

Only 37% of the electorate voted to leave, hardly a convincing amount
for a major constitutional change. The previous government was
elected, with a majority, on a pro EU-membership manifesto. And then
there's the snap general election called by May, from which she was
hoping for an increased majority to implement Brexit. Well, what
happened - they lost their majority completely.

And then a recent opinion poll found the majority of people wanting to
stay in the EU.

On 25/09/17 11:34, pamela wrote:
On 00:27 25 Sep 2017, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 18:27:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 24/09/17 16:48, Mark wrote:
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:40:13 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:02:03 +0100, Mark wrote:

If we want to trade with EU countries then they will.

They need to trade with us, too.

And who is in the stronger position here?

We are.

We actually hold *all* the cards. It's a pity May seems to be
totally unaware of it, though, the useless bitch.

What cards are they? I can't think of many negotiating advantages
that we have.

350m a week


--
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as
foolish, and by the rulers as useful.

(Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 06:12:45 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Mark" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:24:19 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 10:27:56 +0100, Capitol wrote:

You think she will last past Xmas?

I'm beginning to hope not. She's making a total ****-up of everything

Well, that's something we can agree on.

and
I wouldn't be surprised if it's on purpose

OOI why would it be on purpose

She doesn't want Britain to leave the EU.

****ing everying up isn't going to help there. And she does seem to
want to carry on with Brexit regardless of the contraindications.

- unless they are trying to screw-up the country
for the next government because they know
they won't be re-elected.

The give-away was how long it
took the **** to trigger Art.50.

There's many give-aways to reveal their incompetence.

Corse there is nothing like that with Labour, eh ?

This isn't about Labour.

On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 06:08:01 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:

Mark wrote
Cursitor Doom wrote
Dave Plowman (News) wrote

Ah - right. You dislike the idea of one country helping another. And the
principle that as that country become richer, it contributes to others.

At least you're being honest.

You want us to build up other countries while
our own people are sleeping on the streets?

They're not exclusive.

True.

We can sort out both.

Nope. Now that we no longer keep the loonys in locked wards,

No, they're government ministers now.

we're stuck with those that choose to sleep in the streets.

I find it hard to believe that anyone would 'choose' to sleep in the
streets.

And so many families are living in fuel poverty having to choose
between heating and eating? Do you not think we should sort out our
own problems before making any grandiose Cosmopolitan gestures?

The UK is still a rich country

Yes, but it makes no sense to be bailing out fools like the Irish
who keep completely ****ing up, time after time after time.

Or places like Greece who were stupid enough to have by
far the most generous govt pension scheme and didn't even
bother to make their taxpayers pay the taxes they owed.

and we could afford it

But it makes a lot more sense to spend it at home instead
on stuff like the NHS that most get to use eventually and
on building enough new houses so they are affordable
for those just starting working etc.

Money should be spent on these things, but there's no guarantee that
it will.

On 25/09/17 12:21, Mark wrote:
Only 37% of the electorate voted to leave, hardly a convincing amount
for a major constitutional change.

How many voted to enter?



--
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
...I'd spend it on drink.

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

On 12:24 25 Sep 2017, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/09/17 11:34, pamela wrote:
On 00:27 25 Sep 2017, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 18:27:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 24/09/17 16:48, Mark wrote:
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:40:13 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:02:03 +0100, Mark wrote:

If we want to trade with EU countries then they will.

They need to trade with us, too.

And who is in the stronger position here?

We are.

We actually hold *all* the cards. It's a pity May seems to be
totally unaware of it, though, the useless bitch.

What cards are they? I can't think of many negotiating advantages
that we have.

350m a week

You are Boris. ICMFP.

In article , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 25/09/17 11:34, pamela wrote:
On 00:27 25 Sep 2017, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 18:27:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 24/09/17 16:48, Mark wrote:
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:40:13 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:02:03 +0100, Mark wrote:

If we want to trade with EU countries then they will.

They need to trade with us, too.

And who is in the stronger position here?

We are.

We actually hold *all* the cards. It's a pity May seems to be
totally unaware of it, though, the useless bitch.
What cards are they? I can't think of many negotiating advantages
that we have.

350m a week


Gosh we could spend some of that on the NHS.
--
bert

In article , Cursitor Doom
writes
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 21:14:21 +0100, bert wrote:

It's the remainers who are the little Englanders afraid to get out into
the big wide world on their own. They think they can hide behind big
brother.


It's almost as if they suffer from a deep sense of insecurity - probably
arising from a dysfunctional family upbringing. Therefore they need to
feel part of something bigger as some kind of comfort blanket.



I think you're probably right. Still once we've got our £350m per week
back we can spend some of it in the NHS on their mental health.
--
bert

In article , Simon Jones
writes


"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Andy Burns
writes
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

a public speech at Florence

Anyone know /why/ this is in Florence, if as mentioned, nobody in
particular from .eu is going to be there?


The birthplace of European civilisation

Nope, there was european civilisation long before that.

- which some on here will claim
didn't exist before the EU.
-- bert

Perhaps this is more accurate
https://www.enotes.com/homework-help...sidered-import
ant-during-152401
--
bert

In article ,
tim... wrote:
The claim was implicit in the breezy assurances given by Brexiteers
both ebfore and after the referendum that the concerns expressed by
Remainers was largely irrelevant and that it would be a cinch to make
alternative arrangements which would be in our favour.

That's no different from the breezy assurance from Remainers that all of
the EU problems could be resolved by us staying in and changing it from
the inside

The one thing you can be certain of is we won't change any of the EU
'problems' after we leave - even where they still effect us. As some are
bound to.

--
*Plagiarism saves time *

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

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 25/09/17 12:21, Mark wrote:
Only 37% of the electorate voted to leave, hardly a convincing amount
for a major constitutional change.

How many voted to enter?




How many voted to stay in? have you taken off the 1M Irish votes also?

On 25/09/17 13:27, pamela wrote:
On 12:24 25 Sep 2017, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/09/17 11:34, pamela wrote:
On 00:27 25 Sep 2017, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 18:27:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 24/09/17 16:48, Mark wrote:
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:40:13 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:02:03 +0100, Mark wrote:

If we want to trade with EU countries then they will.

They need to trade with us, too.

And who is in the stronger position here?

We are.

We actually hold *all* the cards. It's a pity May seems to be
totally unaware of it, though, the useless bitch.

What cards are they? I can't think of many negotiating advantages
that we have.

350m a week

Gross.

Isn't it?


--
Of what good are dead warriors? €¦ Warriors are those who desire battle
more than peace. Those who seek battle despite peace. Those who thump
their spears on the ground and talk of honor. Those who leap high the
battle dance and dream of glory €¦ The good of dead warriors, Mother, is
that they are dead.
Sheri S Tepper: The Awakeners.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
There are plenty of those. And many UK-based busineses are likely to
relocate when the UK leaves the EU.

This is merely your opinion.

It's a very likely scenario if an international maker who sells to the EU
finds out he is at a disadvantage not manufacturing inside it.

But then the answer is easy. Make those products cheaper to make in the UK
by lowering wages etc to cover any tariffs. But wait - isn't leaving the
EU going to hike up wages because of a smaller labour force?

Or were you lying about that too?

--
*Money isn't everything, but it sure keeps the kids in touch.

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

"Mark" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 06:10:18 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Mark" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:33:48 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 12:00:25 +0100, Mark wrote:

Huh! If we remained a part of the EU we would have some say on how it
is run

Yes, which would be *worthless* because it would be ignored as we've
already seen (unless you're impenetrably dense and unable to see this,
of
course).

Ah, so you don't believe in democracy.

You clearly don't. A majority of those who bothered to
vote decided that they wanted Britain to leave the EU.

Oh dear.

Oh cheep in your case.

It's ironic that Brexiters cry about democracy

No one is crying, just rubbing your stupid nose in your hypocrisy.

when referring to the referendum vote but conveniently forget about
democracy when it doesn't give them the result they wanted.

Just like you did.

Only 37% of the electorate voted to leave,

Irrelevant. You get the same result with many full general elections
and even you should have noticed that that's as close to democracy
as most places that don't have compulsory voting get.

reams of your desperate attempt to bull**** your way out of your
predicament that fools no one at all, flushed where it belongs, remoaner

"Mark" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 06:12:45 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Mark" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:24:19 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 10:27:56 +0100, Capitol wrote:

You think she will last past Xmas?

I'm beginning to hope not. She's making a total ****-up of everything

Well, that's something we can agree on.

and
I wouldn't be surprised if it's on purpose

OOI why would it be on purpose

She doesn't want Britain to leave the EU.

****ing everying up isn't going to help there.

It can do if enough decide that its much too hard
to leave and change their mind on Britain leaving.

And she does seem to want to carry on with
Brexit regardless of the contraindications.

But she clearly is quite capable of changing her
mind radically like with the general election if
she decides that that might be to her advantage.

- unless they are trying to screw-up the country
for the next government because they know
they won't be re-elected.

The give-away was how long it
took the **** to trigger Art.50.

There's many give-aways to reveal their incompetence.

Corse there is nothing like that with Labour, eh ?

This isn't about Labour.

Corse it is when that is the alternative govt that got close
to being the govt in the most recent election and that fool
Corbyn is now not equivocating so much on leaving.

"Mark" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 06:08:01 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:

Mark wrote
Cursitor Doom wrote
Dave Plowman (News) wrote

Ah - right. You dislike the idea of one country helping another. And
the
principle that as that country become richer, it contributes to
others.

At least you're being honest.

You want us to build up other countries while
our own people are sleeping on the streets?

They're not exclusive.

True.

We can sort out both.

Nope. Now that we no longer keep the loonys in locked wards,

No, they're government ministers now.

we're stuck with those that choose to sleep in the streets.

I find it hard to believe that anyone would 'choose' to sleep in the
streets.

The worst of the loonys do anyway. Apparently because they
don't like the rules imposed by the obvious alternatives
when they arent capable of renting and are too far gone
to even manage to work out how to operate in squats.

And so many families are living in fuel poverty having to choose
between heating and eating? Do you not think we should sort out our
own problems before making any grandiose Cosmopolitan gestures?

The UK is still a rich country

Yes, but it makes no sense to be bailing out fools like the Irish
who keep completely ****ing up, time after time after time.

Or places like Greece who were stupid enough to have by
far the most generous govt pension scheme and didn't even
bother to make their taxpayers pay the taxes they owed.

and we could afford it

But it makes a lot more sense to spend it at home instead
on stuff like the NHS that most get to use eventually and
on building enough new houses so they are affordable
for those just starting working etc.

Money should be spent on these things,
but there's no guarantee that it will.

There are no guarantees on anything, but clearly when
£350 a week isnt going to the EU, quite a bit of that is
going to be available to be spend locally instead.

"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Simon Jones
writes


"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Andy Burns
writes
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

a public speech at Florence

Anyone know /why/ this is in Florence, if as mentioned, nobody in
particular from .eu is going to be there?


The birthplace of European civilisation

Nope, there was european civilisation long before that.

- which some on here will claim
didn't exist before the EU.
-- bert

Perhaps this is more accurate
https://www.enotes.com/homework-help...sidered-import
ant-during-152401

Yes, and that is a long time after the first European civilisation.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:
The claim was implicit in the breezy assurances given by Brexiteers
both ebfore and after the referendum that the concerns expressed by
Remainers was largely irrelevant and that it would be a cinch to make
alternative arrangements which would be in our favour.

That's no different from the breezy assurance from Remainers that all of
the EU problems could be resolved by us staying in and changing it from
the inside

The one thing you can be certain of is we won't change any of the EU
'problems' after we leave - even where they still effect us. As some are
bound to.

Sure, but will change plenty of other stuff like the movement of EUians
to Britain and stop sending anything like as much money to the EU to
**** against the wall.

In article ,
tim... wrote:
If we want to trade with EU countries then they will.

the rules that we want to change aren't the pettifogging ones about square
bananas - they are just an annoyance.

'We'? Just who are you speaking for now? Lots on here want to buy a noisy
inefficient vacuum cleaner. Not because they actually want one - just
because the EU has set a standard.

the ones that we fundamentally disagree with and need to change if we
were to stay in are the ones about "closer political and financial
union" that the EU seems hell bent on.

'We' again. Please just speak for yourself.

Once out, they are no longer of interest to us. - they won't be an
impediment to trade for non members

Us, now. Why are you seeking to add credence to your argument by claiming
you speak for everyone?

--
*Suicidal twin kills sister by mistake.

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

"pamela" wrote in message
...
On 11:47 25 Sep 2017, Tim Streater wrote:

In article , pamela
wrote:

On 00:27 25 Sep 2017, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 18:27:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 24/09/17 16:48, Mark wrote:
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:40:13 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:02:03 +0100, Mark wrote:

If we want to trade with EU countries then they will.

They need to trade with us, too.

And who is in the stronger position here?

We are.

We actually hold *all* the cards. It's a pity May seems to be
totally unaware of it, though, the useless bitch.

What cards are they? I can't think of many negotiating
advantages that we have.

We can walk away and then the EU has a £10B hole in its
finances.

Breaking off negoatiations and walking
away is nothing more than a fantasy.

Bull****.

Theresa May has effectively turned away from
her former "no deal is better than a bad deal".

More fool her.

Now the EU doesn't see this as a credible option,

It is anyway.

so won't factor it in to their thinking.

But that makes it more likely it will happen,
particularly if May gets the bums rush and
Boris ends up driving the bus.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

'We' again. Please just speak for yourself.

Then perhaps you should give up "guessing" what every
tory-voter/right-winger/capitalist thinks?

"pamela" wrote in message
...
On 00:27 25 Sep 2017, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 18:27:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 24/09/17 16:48, Mark wrote:
On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 15:40:13 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Sep 2017 13:02:03 +0100, Mark wrote:

If we want to trade with EU countries then they will.

They need to trade with us, too.

And who is in the stronger position here?

We are.

We actually hold *all* the cards. It's a pity May seems to be
totally unaware of it, though, the useless bitch.

What cards are they? I can't think of many negotiating advantages
that we have.

Yes, that has always been your problem.

The obvious one is the £350M a week Britain currently sends the EU

And there is the small matter of the aircraft engines
and wings that Airbus needs to be economically viable.

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
There are plenty of those. And many UK-based busineses are likely to
relocate when the UK leaves the EU.

This is merely your opinion.

It's a very likely scenario if an international maker who sells to the EU
finds out he is at a disadvantage not manufacturing inside it.

That's why since the Brexit vote they've all announced major new
investment in the UK
But then the answer is easy.
Wrong answers usually the easy ones.
Make those products cheaper to make in the UK
by lowering wages etc to cover any tariffs. But wait - isn't leaving the
EU going to hike up wages because of a smaller labour force?

Something lefties can never get their heads round is the impact of
ideologically motivated measures on business confidence and ultimately
improved tax revenues.
Or were you lying about that too?

Truth often hurts.
--
bert

In article ,
Andy Burns wrote:
'We' again. Please just speak for yourself.

Then perhaps you should give up "guessing" what every
tory-voter/right-winger/capitalist thinks?

Absolutely no need to guess - they're so transparent.

But then I don't claim to speak for anyone other than myself.

--
*Why is a boxing ring square?

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

On 25/09/17 17:57, Simon Jones wrote:


"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Simon Jones
writes


"bert" wrote in message
...
In article , Andy Burns
writes
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

a public speech at Florence

Anyone know /why/ this is in Florence, if as mentioned, nobody in
particular from .eu is going to be there?


The birthplace of European civilisation

Nope, there was european civilisation long before that.

- which some on here will claim
didn't exist before the EU.
--Â* bert

Perhaps this is more accurate
https://www.enotes.com/homework-help...sidered-import
ant-during-152401

Yes, and that is a long time after the first European civilisation.
Yeah but she was hardly going to go to Crete was she?


--
Microsoft : the best reason to go to Linux that ever existed.

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
No. There are many who predicting this and several large companies
have expressed the desire to leave.

Oh, predictions, eh? Like those that by now there would be an extra
500k unemployed if we voted Leave?

Try a level playing field. There looks to be little chance now of us
actually cutting off all trade agreements with the EU as some Brexiteers
wanted.

And if we end up with a free trade agreement, why would international
companies based here who trade with the EU need to leave?

I'd hope most businesses would run on facts - not a gut reaction like most
Brexiteers.

--
*I'm planning to be spontaneous tomorrow *

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