What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726
We'll all be driving electric cars soon.

On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

We'll all be driving electric cars soon.

They need to be improved a huge amount before that is likely. However,
we do appear to being forced to drive hybrids in future.

--
--

Colin Bignell

On 29/11/17 10:24, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Nightjar
wrote:

On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

The £4300 per person and half million unemployed we were all threatened
with, these represent "truth", do they?

quite possibly.

We don't have a crystal ball. But I wonder what was in the government's
reports that they won't publish. Something so awful that Davis would
rather be accused of Contempt of Parliament than tell us.

What a **** up brexit is!

TW

On 29/11/17 10:27, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 10:09:40 +0000, Nightjar
wrote:

On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

Bearing in mind that Gore's bit of self-serving propaganda has been
widely criticised and generally dismissed, your analogy is probably a
lot more apt than you intended it to be.

We'll all be driving electric cars soon.

They need to be improved a huge amount before that is likely. However,
we do appear to being forced to drive hybrids in future.

I quite fancy an electric car when my existing diesel finally gives
up. Probably have to get onto Economy 7 for the electricity first
though.

_Gove's_ propaganda?

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Nightjar
wrote:

On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

The £4300 per person and half million unemployed we were all threatened
with, these represent "truth", do they?

Given we haven't yet left the EU? And I take it you think the negotiations
going awfully well? Exactly as brexiteers predicted?

Which planet are you on today?

-

--
*You sound reasonable......time to up my medication

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

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 10:09:47 UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

We'll all be driving electric cars soon.

They need to be improved a huge amount before that is likely. However,
we do appear to being forced to drive hybrids in future.

--
--

Colin Bignell

Try to keep up!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...vans-from-2040

Hybrids are to be banned too.

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 10:09:47 UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

We'll all be driving electric cars soon.



Project fear is the bollix spouted by brain dead remainers.

On 29/11/2017 11:33, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 10:09:47 UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

We'll all be driving electric cars soon.



Project fear is the bollix spouted by brain dead remainers.


So, it's ******** to suggest that the £350m per week bonus to the NHS
was simply a lie?

The true net cost of membership is £100m a week = £5bn a year. And the
news that we have now offered to pay £50bn in exit costs. This is all
********?

Plus, our industries will struggle hugely once we are out of the EU,
unless we stay in the customs union.

Plus, unless we stay in the customs union, we won't be able to have an
open border with the ROI.

And, of course, we'll be able to stay in the customs union and control
our borders.

All that Brexit will achieve is misery. It won't even satisfy the bigots
by keeping out the immigrants.

On 29-Nov-17 11:31 AM, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 10:09:47 UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

We'll all be driving electric cars soon.

They need to be improved a huge amount before that is likely. However,
we do appear to being forced to drive hybrids in future.

--
--

Colin Bignell

Try to keep up!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...vans-from-2040

Hybrids are to be banned too.

Wrong again Harry

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/i...diesel-car-ban

--
--

Colin Bignell

Tim Streater wrote:
In article , GB
wrote:

On 29/11/2017 11:33, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 10:09:47 UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

We'll all be driving electric cars soon.

Project fear is the bollix spouted by brain dead remainers.

So, it's ******** to suggest that the £350m per week bonus to the NHS
was simply a lie?

1. Nobody promised £350m

2. It was a serving suggestion by Vote Leave, a cross-party referendum
team. They aren't in Govt.

3. It never said the *ENTIRE* £350m should go to the NHS - it said
let's fund the NHS instead of sending all that money to Brussels.

So yes, your suggestion *is* ********.

The true net cost of membership is £100m a week = £5bn a year.

Plus a lot of money directed where we don't necessarily want it to go.

And the news that we have now offered to pay £50bn in exit costs.
This is all ********?

The Lisbon Treaty, so I read, defines the EU as a person - responsible
for its own debts. Meaning we should not be paying anything.

Plus, our industries will struggle hugely once we are out of the EU,
unless we stay in the customs union.

Must be why they're all lining up to invest here.

Plus, unless we stay in the customs union, we won't be able to have an
open border with the ROI.

Yes we will. We can simply choose not to create one.


Bear in mind that the corrected voting ratio was 56% Leave and 44% stay
and that the true current coest of being in the EU with unlimited
immigration is approaching £1B per week!

On 29/11/2017 12:15, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , GB
wrote:

On 29/11/2017 11:33, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 10:09:47 UTC, NightjarÂ* wrote:
On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

We'll all be driving electric cars soon.

Project fear is the bollix spouted by brain dead remainers.

So, it's ******** to suggest that the £350m per week bonus to the NHS
was simply a lie?

1. Nobody promised £350m

2. It was a serving suggestion by Vote Leave, a cross-party referendum
team. They aren't in Govt.

3. It never said the *ENTIRE* £350m should go to the NHS - it said
let's fund the NHS instead of sending all that money to Brussels.

So yes, your suggestion *is* ********.


You're really having to scrape the bottom of the barrel. The British
people were well and truly lied to.


The true net cost of membership is £100m a week = £5bn a year.

Plus a lot of money directed where we don't necessarily want it to go.

That's partly true. However, we have already promised the farmers (the
main recipients) that they'll continue to get the same feather bedding
they are used to.


And the news that we have now offered to pay £50bn in exit costs.
This is all ********?

The Lisbon Treaty, so I read, defines the EU as a person - responsible
for its own debts. Meaning we should not be paying anything.

Brexiteers seem to be utterly detached from reality.


Plus, our industries will struggle hugely once we are out of the EU,
unless we stay in the customs union.

Must be why they're all lining up to invest here.

Last I heard, investment decisions amounting to £50bn had been put on hold.



Plus, unless we stay in the customs union, we won't be able to have an
open border with the ROI.

Yes we will. We can simply choose not to create one.


We won't be able to have any tariffs, because the goods will simply come
across the border with the ROI. You need to stop the wishful thinking.

On 29/11/2017 12:26, Capitol wrote:

Â*Â*Â*Â*Bear in mind that the corrected voting ratio was 56% Leave and 44%
stay

Really? Who corrected it?


and that the true current coest of being in the EU with unlimited
immigration is approaching £1B per week!

I have no doubt that unlimited immigration costs money, but I question
whether leaving the EU is the way to deal with it. Particularly as, once
the dust has settled, we'll continue to have unlimited immigration. What
else does an open border with the ROI mean?

In article ,
GB wrote:
All that Brexit will achieve is misery. It won't even satisfy the bigots
by keeping out the immigrants.

All they need to do is get engaged to a prince. Or even a queen - lots
more of them.

--
*Sherlock Holmes never said "Elementary, my dear Watson" *

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

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
So, it's ******** to suggest that the £350m per week bonus to the NHS
was simply a lie?

1. Nobody promised £350m

2. It was a serving suggestion by Vote Leave, a cross-party referendum
team. They aren't in Govt.

3. It never said the *ENTIRE* £350m should go to the NHS - it said
let's fund the NHS instead of sending all that money to Brussels.

That '£350 million' soon became many times that if everything leave
suggested it could be used for was implemented. But Brexiteers have been
shown to have the maths of a poor 5 year old.

--
*It was all so different before everything changed.

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

Tim Streater wrote:

In article , GB
wrote:


Plus, unless we stay in the customs union, we won't be able to have an
open border with the ROI.

Yes we will. We can simply choose not to create one.

Suppose the Irish choose to put border posts their side?

--

Roger Hayter

On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 12:55:04 +0000, GB wrote:

On 29/11/2017 12:26, Capitol wrote:

Â*Â*Â*Â*Bear in mind that the corrected voting ratio was 56% Leave and
Â*Â*Â*Â*44%
stay

Really? Who corrected it?


and that the true current coest of being in the EU with unlimited
immigration is approaching £1B per week!

I have no doubt that unlimited immigration costs money, but I question
whether leaving the EU is the way to deal with it. Particularly as, once
the dust has settled, we'll continue to have unlimited immigration. What
else does an open border with the ROI mean?

Not to mention that, if we have to shore up the economy by doing a trade
deal with India, we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants. Not
that I mind, but it certainly isn't goiung to reduce immigration as
promised.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 14:14:52 +0000, (Roger Hayter)
wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

In article , GB
wrote:


Plus, unless we stay in the customs union, we won't be able to have an
open border with the ROI.

Yes we will. We can simply choose not to create one.

Suppose the Irish choose to put border posts their side?

Then in 20 years time when it rots we can say the posts are on your
side, it's your fence you replace it.


G.Harman

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 14:24:14 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 12:55:04 +0000, GB wrote:

Not to mention that, if we have to shore up the economy by doing a trade
deal with India,

Is a trade deal the same as an immigration deal ?

Is it worked out in immigrants per pack of crisps or something.


That's what the EU seems to think.


we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants.

I personally think there;s more india doctors than Polsih or romanain doctors.

But what I don't understand is why trade and immigration has to be linked.


Not
that I mind, but it certainly isn't goiung to reduce immigration as
promised.

On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:00:35 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:


we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants.

I personally think there;s more india doctors than Polsih or romanain
doctors.

But what I don't understand is why trade and immigration has to be
linked.

It's what the Indians want.

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 15:40:01 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:00:35 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:


we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants.

I personally think there;s more india doctors than Polsih or romanain
doctors.

But what I don't understand is why trade and immigration has to be
linked.

It's what the Indians want.

I didn't think india was in the EU.

On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:49:48 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 15:40:01 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:00:35 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:


we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants.

I personally think there;s more india doctors than Polsih or romanain
doctors.

But what I don't understand is why trade and immigration has to be
linked.

It's what the Indians want.

I didn't think india was in the EU.

(sigh) They won't agree a good trade deal post-Brexit unless we allow
more Indians to coem here.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 16:16:32 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:49:48 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 15:40:01 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:00:35 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:


we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants.

I personally think there;s more india doctors than Polsih or romanain
doctors.

But what I don't understand is why trade and immigration has to be
linked.

It's what the Indians want.

I didn't think india was in the EU.

(sigh) They won't agree a good trade deal post-Brexit unless we allow
more Indians to coem here.

So how many billions are they asking for, before they agree a deal ?

On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 08:24:07 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 16:16:32 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:49:48 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 15:40:01 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:00:35 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:


we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants.

I personally think there;s more india doctors than Polsih or
romanain doctors.

But what I don't understand is why trade and immigration has to be
linked.

It's what the Indians want.

I didn't think india was in the EU.

(sigh) They won't agree a good trade deal post-Brexit unless we allow
more Indians to coem here.

So how many billions are they asking for, before they agree a deal ?

Irrelevant. They want immigration. One of the planks of the Liver
argument.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 16:29:36 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 08:24:07 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 16:16:32 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:49:48 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 15:40:01 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:00:35 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:


we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants.

I personally think there;s more india doctors than Polsih or
romanain doctors.

But what I don't understand is why trade and immigration has to be
linked.

It's what the Indians want.

I didn't think india was in the EU.

(sigh) They won't agree a good trade deal post-Brexit unless we allow
more Indians to coem here.

So how many billions are they asking for, before they agree a deal ?

Irrelevant. They want immigration. One of the planks of the Liver
argument.

No idea what planks of the Liver argument is.

Lots of countries want immigration.

On 29/11/17 14:24, Bob Eager wrote:
Not to mention that, if we have to shore up the economy by doing a trade
deal with India, we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants.

Why?

Total ********


--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

On 29/11/17 16:16, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:49:48 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 15:40:01 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:00:35 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:


we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants.

I personally think there;s more india doctors than Polsih or romanain
doctors.

But what I don't understand is why trade and immigration has to be
linked.

It's what the Indians want.

I didn't think india was in the EU.

(sigh) They won't agree a good trade deal post-Brexit unless we allow
more Indians to coem here.



Then they can have WTO an lump it.



--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

On 29/11/17 12:42, Huge wrote:
Pathetic, isn't it? Lies upon lies upon lies. And the lying, xenophobic,
racist, closed-minded Little Englander ****s have*already* cost us £20bn.

Pathetic, isn't it? Lies upon lies upon lies. And the lying, xenophobic,
racist, closed-minded Little Europeaner ****s have *already* cost us £20bn.


TFTFY

--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 29/11/17 14:24, Bob Eager wrote:
Not to mention that, if we have to shore up the economy by doing a
trade deal with India, we'll have to accept a lot more Indian
immigrants.

Why?

Total ********

That's what an Indian government spokesman said. But being a true
Brexiteer, you'll be very use to people telling lies.

--
*Welcome to **** Creek - sorry, we're out of paddles*

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

In article , Nightjar
writes
On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

We'll all be driving electric cars soon.

They need to be improved a huge amount before that is likely. However,
we do appear to being forced to drive hybrids in future.

And where is the Ford Transit made - move funded by the EU.
Bridgend is at risk because JLR have cut short an engine supply contract
--
bert

On 29/11/2017 12:55, GB wrote:
On 29/11/2017 12:26, Capitol wrote:

Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Bear in mind that the corrected voting ratio was 56% Leave and
44% stay

Really? Who corrected it?


and that the true current coest of being in the EU with unlimited
immigration is approaching £1B per week!

I have no doubt that unlimited immigration costs money, but I question
whether leaving the EU is the way to deal with it. Particularly as, once
the dust has settled, we'll continue to have unlimited immigration. What
else does an open border with the ROI mean?

The idea is not to stop people coming in and out of the UK
(legitimately) and due to the Irish Republic not being in Shengen, an
open border is no less secure than what we have now.

The difference is that of those who do come into the UK, only the Irish
(due to existing treaties) will have the automatic right to work and
reside here. The rest of the EU will not.

So they can come in and out as they please as visitors, but not as
immigrants.

SteveW

On 29-Nov-17 10:24 AM, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Nightjar
wrote:

On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

The £4300 per person and half million unemployed we were all threatened
with, these represent "truth", do they?


It would be silly to expect any one particular prediction to be
absolutely true. With so many forecasts of how badly Brexit will affect
us, they can't all be right and we won't even know which are reasonably
accurate until we reach the future dates they refer to. However one of
the inconvenient truths is that even just the threat of leaving has
already increased household costs.

--
--

Colin Bignell

On 29/11/2017 08:36, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Its not project fear its what is likely to happen, unless we pay the
billions and get a free trade deal.

You brex****eers have done well and now want to blame everyone else.

"GB" wrote in message
news
On 29/11/2017 11:33, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 10:09:47 UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

We'll all be driving electric cars soon.



Project fear is the bollix spouted by brain dead remainers.


So, it's ******** to suggest that the £350m per week bonus to the NHS was
simply a lie?

The true net cost of membership is £100m a week = £5bn a year. And the
news that we have now offered to pay £50bn in exit costs. This is all
********?

Plus, our industries will struggle hugely once we are out of the EU,
unless we stay in the customs union.

Bet they dont given that most of what Britain exports to the EU
like aircraft engines, wings, docos etc they can't supply themselves.

And other stuff like financial services they do much more poorly.

Plus, unless we stay in the customs union, we won't be able to have an
open border with the ROI.

Thats not right either. There are other examples of open borders
where in theory they should have full closed borders.

And, of course, we'll be able to stay in the customs union and control our
borders.

Corse that possible. Britain currently controls its borders to the
EU, just has to let any EUian who wants to move to Britain to
do so. Britain outside the EU wont have to do that anymore.

All that Brexit will achieve is misery.

Even sillier than you usually manage, and thats saying something.

It won't even satisfy the bigots by keeping out the immigrants.

But will allow Britain to be selective about which immigrants it allows.

Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 12:55:04 +0000, GB wrote:

On 29/11/2017 12:26, Capitol wrote:

Bear in mind that the corrected voting ratio was 56% Leave and
44%
stay

Really? Who corrected it?


and that the true current coest of being in the EU with unlimited
immigration is approaching £1B per week!

I have no doubt that unlimited immigration costs money, but I question
whether leaving the EU is the way to deal with it. Particularly as, once
the dust has settled, we'll continue to have unlimited immigration. What
else does an open border with the ROI mean?

Not to mention that, if we have to shore up the economy by doing a trade
deal with India, we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants. Not
that I mind, but it certainly isn't goiung to reduce immigration as
promised.




Remoaner making it up as you go along again!

Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:49:48 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 15:40:01 UTC, Bob Eager wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:00:35 -0800, whisky-dave wrote:


we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants.

I personally think there;s more india doctors than Polsih or romanain
doctors.

But what I don't understand is why trade and immigration has to be
linked.

It's what the Indians want.

I didn't think india was in the EU.

(sigh) They won't agree a good trade deal post-Brexit unless we allow
more Indians to coem here.




Lies!

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
So, it's ******** to suggest that the £350m per week bonus to the NHS
was simply a lie?

1. Nobody promised £350m

2. It was a serving suggestion by Vote Leave, a cross-party referendum
team. They aren't in Govt.

3. It never said the *ENTIRE* £350m should go to the NHS - it said
let's fund the NHS instead of sending all that money to Brussels.

That '£350 million' soon became many times that if everything leave
suggested it could be used for was implemented. But Brexiteers have been
shown to have the maths of a poor 5 year old.


Still much better than Dianne Abbott or any other socialist!

"GB" wrote in message
news
On 29/11/2017 12:15, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , GB
wrote:

On 29/11/2017 11:33, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 10:09:47 UTC, Nightjar wrote:
On 29-Nov-17 8:36 AM, harry wrote:
What a load of drivel!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39537726

Project fear is Brexiteer speak for inconvenient truth.

We'll all be driving electric cars soon.

Project fear is the bollix spouted by brain dead remainers.

So, it's ******** to suggest that the £350m per week bonus to the NHS
was simply a lie?

1. Nobody promised £350m

2. It was a serving suggestion by Vote Leave, a cross-party referendum
team. They aren't in Govt.

3. It never said the *ENTIRE* £350m should go to the NHS - it said
let's fund the NHS instead of sending all that money to Brussels.

So yes, your suggestion *is* ********.


You're really having to scrape the bottom of the barrel. The British
people were well and truly lied to.


The true net cost of membership is £100m a week = £5bn a year.

Plus a lot of money directed where we don't necessarily want it to go.

That's partly true. However, we have already promised the farmers (the
main recipients) that they'll continue to get the same feather bedding
they are used to.


And the news that we have now offered to pay £50bn in exit costs.
This is all ********?

The Lisbon Treaty, so I read, defines the EU as a person - responsible
for its own debts. Meaning we should not be paying anything.

Brexiteers seem to be utterly detached from reality.


Plus, our industries will struggle hugely once we are out of the EU,
unless we stay in the customs union.

Must be why they're all lining up to invest here.

Last I heard, investment decisions amounting to £50bn had been put on
hold.



Plus, unless we stay in the customs union, we won't be able to have an
open border with the ROI.

Yes we will. We can simply choose not to create one.


We won't be able to have any tariffs,

Bull****. And there arent that many tariffs left now anyway.

because the goods will simply come across the border with the ROI.

No one is going to bother with most of the high volume
imports and it isnt even possible with many of them, they
have to keep coming thru the existing ports and airports.

You need to stop the wishful thinking.

Pity about the other open borders.

"GB" wrote in message
news
On 29/11/2017 12:26, Capitol wrote:

Bear in mind that the corrected voting ratio was 56% Leave and 44%
stay

Really? Who corrected it?


and that the true current coest of being in the EU with unlimited
immigration is approaching £1B per week!

I have no doubt that unlimited immigration costs money, but I question
whether leaving the EU is the way to deal with it.

There is no other way with immigration from the EU, that
something the EU imposes on all EU member countrys.

Particularly as, once the dust has settled, we'll continue to have
unlimited immigration.

Even sillier than you usually manage, and thats saying something.

What else does an open border with the ROI mean?

That far fewer will bother to go that route than currently
use the more convenient way they currently arrive.

"Roger Hayter" wrote in message
...
Tim Streater wrote:

In article , GB
wrote:


Plus, unless we stay in the customs union, we won't be able to have an
open border with the ROI.

Yes we will. We can simply choose not to create one.

Suppose the Irish choose to put border posts their side?

Why would they ?

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 29 Nov 2017 12:55:04 +0000, GB wrote:

On 29/11/2017 12:26, Capitol wrote:

Bear in mind that the corrected voting ratio was 56% Leave and
44%
stay

Really? Who corrected it?


and that the true current coest of being in the EU with unlimited
immigration is approaching £1B per week!

I have no doubt that unlimited immigration costs money, but I question
whether leaving the EU is the way to deal with it. Particularly as, once
the dust has settled, we'll continue to have unlimited immigration. What
else does an open border with the ROI mean?

Not to mention that, if we have to shore up the economy by doing a
trade deal with India, we'll have to accept a lot more Indian immigrants.

Nope, thats just an ambit claim.

Not that I mind, but it certainly isn't goiung
to reduce immigration as promised.

Corse it will with EU immigrants.