Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


Well Davis, I don't want the garbage, so I don't blame the rest of
Europe one bit!!

AB

On 08/02/2018 21:41, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

david-davis-in-swipe-at-eu-over-leaked-brexit-documents-a3762021.html



Do we need yet another pointless brexit thread in this group?

We already know that all our politicians are a bunch of self promoting
money/power grabbing losers.

We already know that all brexiteers are bigoted, racist and are of very
low intelligence.

We already know that the only people fit to rule the country are those
who voted remain.

--
mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

On Thu, 8 Feb 2018 21:53:15 +0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 08/02/2018 21:41, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

david-davis-in-swipe-at-eu-over-leaked-brexit-documents-a3762021.html



Do we need yet another pointless brexit thread in this group?

We already know that all our politicians are a bunch of self promoting
money/power grabbing losers.

We already know that all brexiteers are bigoted, racist and are of very
low intelligence.

We already know that the only people fit to rule the country are those
who voted remain.

Yes but are you aware that they are using our taxes to advertise the
poor educational standards of the country?

The fact that the people in power are so completley stupid should be
top secret information. They should be kept out of site and earshot
and only be let out in cases of dire national emergency.

An outbreak of plague might be appropriate.

AB

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


the same right that they have if the USA (or China) import it directly to
them

that it doesn't comply with local product standards requirements

tim

On 08/02/2018 21:53, alan_m wrote:

We already know that all brexiteers are bigoted, racist and are of very
low intelligence.

We already know that the only people fit to rule the country are those
who voted remain.


We do, do we?

On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 10:34:53 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


the same right that they have if the USA (or China) import it directly to
them

that it doesn't comply with local product standards requirements

tim


Which is why customs will be needed, if a product line is not in
keeping with internal standards, trading cannot continue unimpeded.
As Fox, Davis and co think selling the EU carcinogenic crud that we
have imported from the US and similar adventures is a minor
technicality not worthy of any action, it just shows the level of
stupidity and ignorance they posess.

AB

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 10:34:53 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


the same right that they have if the USA (or China) import it directly to
them

that it doesn't comply with local product standards requirements

tim


Which is why customs will be needed,

but we don't have that system at the moment with imports from ROW

We have a system of checking product compliance at point of sale (usually
initiated by extra-governmental bodies such as consumer advice
organizations)

Because the theory that, just because a product has come from inside the EU
it must automatically comply (because all EU companies are good boys who
will followed the rules) is incorrect.

The two biggest scandals of broken standards in that past 10 years, the beef
that was really horse and Dieselgate were both perpetrated by companies from
INSIDE the EU, so that method of checking at point of sale cannot be
dismantled and replaced with checks at point of entry..

if a product line is not in
keeping with internal standards, trading cannot continue unimpeded.

Of course it can.

As Fox, Davis and co think selling the EU carcinogenic crud that we
have imported from the US and similar adventures is a minor
technicality not worthy of any action, it just shows the level of
stupidity and ignorance they posess.

No one says that it isn't worthy of action

that are saying that the method that is posited to solve the problem DOESN'T
WORK. And this isn't idle speculation. It has been PROVEN not to work.

tim

On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 09:08:19 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 10:34:53 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


the same right that they have if the USA (or China) import it directly to
them

that it doesn't comply with local product standards requirements

tim


Which is why customs will be needed,

but we don't have that system at the moment with imports from ROW

ROW?

We do have customs, I assume that technically we have some level of
customs intervention even with traffic from the EU, otherwise there
would be no blue channel at airports.


Customs does seem to have a low involvement now, at one time half the
type of stuff I order from Ebay would be opened and I think it was
over £12-00 in value before money had to be sent, but they never
failed to bill One.

I notice that the stuff that comes directly from China is labelled up
"samples" or suchlike, makes a change from "used clothing left after
holiday".

Even posting houseplants to Ireland was a customs holdup, I seem to
recollect it wasn't straight duty though, it was an "import licence".

We have a system of checking product compliance at point of sale (usually
initiated by extra-governmental bodies such as consumer advice
organizations)

Because the theory that, just because a product has come from inside the EU
it must automatically comply (because all EU companies are good boys who
will followed the rules) is incorrect.

The two biggest scandals of broken standards in that past 10 years, the beef
that was really horse and Dieselgate were both perpetrated by companies from
INSIDE the EU, so that method of checking at point of sale cannot be
dismantled and replaced with checks at point of entry..

if a product line is not in
keeping with internal standards, trading cannot continue unimpeded.

Of course it can.

It is. Try buying sodium chlorate or a 2.5kW domestic vacuum.

I do not know the full mechanism, currently, but I am aware that
customs regulations were the reasons for holdups from Europe before
the EU.

I recollect VHS VCR's coming through France had to be opened,
inspected and recorded before being shipped on to us.

Of course the fact that the 2000 system was in the early production
stages had nothing to do with it :-)



As Fox, Davis and co think selling the EU carcinogenic crud that we
have imported from the US and similar adventures is a minor
technicality not worthy of any action, it just shows the level of
stupidity and ignorance they posess.

No one says that it isn't worthy of action

that are saying that the method that is posited to solve the problem DOESN'T
WORK. And this isn't idle speculation. It has been PROVEN not to work.

tim


AB

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 09:08:19 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 10:34:53 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


the same right that they have if the USA (or China) import it directly
to
them

that it doesn't comply with local product standards requirements

tim


Which is why customs will be needed,

but we don't have that system at the moment with imports from ROW

ROW?

We do have customs, I assume that technically we have some level of
customs intervention even with traffic from the EU, otherwise there
would be no blue channel at airports.

Customers checks are for the purposes of collecting duty, not checking
against product standards.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in you choice of words. I am happy to
use the term customs checks for this process as long as you understand that
collecting duty and standards compliance are two distinct and separate tasks

Commercial importation is the same

manifests are read so that duty can be assessed.

Individual boxes are not opened so that product can be tested for product
compliance.

Hopefully we will have agreed an FTA so that there is no need for any duty
to be assessed and that part will be dispensed with too.

Customs does seem to have a low involvement now, at one time half the
type of stuff I order from Ebay would be opened and I think it was
over £12-00 in value before money had to be sent, but they never
failed to bill One.

domestic importation has been seen to cost them more than they collect

unless they suspect importation of an illegal substance you will often get
away with it.

I notice that the stuff that comes directly from China is labelled up
"samples" or suchlike, makes a change from "used clothing left after
holiday".

Even posting houseplants to Ireland was a customs holdup, I seem to
recollect it wasn't straight duty though, it was an "import licence".

We have a system of checking product compliance at point of sale (usually
initiated by extra-governmental bodies such as consumer advice
organizations)

Because the theory that, just because a product has come from inside the
EU
it must automatically comply (because all EU companies are good boys who
will followed the rules) is incorrect.

The two biggest scandals of broken standards in that past 10 years, the
beef
that was really horse and Dieselgate were both perpetrated by companies
from
INSIDE the EU, so that method of checking at point of sale cannot be
dismantled and replaced with checks at point of entry..

if a product line is not in
keeping with internal standards, trading cannot continue unimpeded.

Of course it can.

It is. Try buying sodium chlorate or a 2.5kW domestic vacuum.

and this is enforced at point of sale

what point are you making?

I do not know the full mechanism, currently, but I am aware that
customs regulations were the reasons for holdups from Europe before
the EU.

they were

buy they won't be reinvented just for the sake of it (if they do it to us,
we will do it to them)

logistics has changed in the past 30 years

even importation from countries such as Ukraine are a million times easier
than 30 years ago

Everything is done by pre-authorization on computer

as long as there is no reasons for the customs official to suspect that
what's in the truck is not what's on the manifest, you get waved through.
And when I say suspect that "there's the wrong thing in the truck" I mean
something fundamentally illegal such as guns, drugs or people. Not, out of
spec squeaky rubber ducks instead of in spec squeaky rubber ducks.

tim

On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 13:11:15 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 09:08:19 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 10:34:53 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


the same right that they have if the USA (or China) import it directly
to
them

that it doesn't comply with local product standards requirements

tim


Which is why customs will be needed,

but we don't have that system at the moment with imports from ROW

ROW?

We do have customs, I assume that technically we have some level of
customs intervention even with traffic from the EU, otherwise there
would be no blue channel at airports.

Customers checks are for the purposes of collecting duty, not checking
against product standards.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in you choice of words. I am happy to
use the term customs checks for this process as long as you understand that
collecting duty and standards compliance are two distinct and separate tasks

Commercial importation is the same

manifests are read so that duty can be assessed.

Individual boxes are not opened so that product can be tested for product
compliance.

Hopefully we will have agreed an FTA so that there is no need for any duty
to be assessed and that part will be dispensed with too.

Customs does seem to have a low involvement now, at one time half the
type of stuff I order from Ebay would be opened and I think it was
over £12-00 in value before money had to be sent, but they never
failed to bill One.

domestic importation has been seen to cost them more than they collect

unless they suspect importation of an illegal substance you will often get
away with it.

I notice that the stuff that comes directly from China is labelled up
"samples" or suchlike, makes a change from "used clothing left after
holiday".

Even posting houseplants to Ireland was a customs holdup, I seem to
recollect it wasn't straight duty though, it was an "import licence".

This wasn't a payment of duty, this was payment for a right to import
a specific type of product. i.e compliance.

The actual costs was miniscule, but I remember the balls of dried
earth that fell from the package when it was finally delivered.

Maybe the issuing department was the ministry of agriculture or
suchlike, but the interception was done by customs.

We have a system of checking product compliance at point of sale (usually
initiated by extra-governmental bodies such as consumer advice
organizations)

Because the theory that, just because a product has come from inside the
EU
it must automatically comply (because all EU companies are good boys who
will followed the rules) is incorrect.

The two biggest scandals of broken standards in that past 10 years, the
beef
that was really horse and Dieselgate were both perpetrated by companies
from
INSIDE the EU, so that method of checking at point of sale cannot be
dismantled and replaced with checks at point of entry..

if a product line is not in
keeping with internal standards, trading cannot continue unimpeded.

Of course it can.

It is. Try buying sodium chlorate or a 2.5kW domestic vacuum.

and this is enforced at point of sale

what point are you making?

Trading in the items is impeded, I would have to go to a lot of effort
to try to obtain sodium chlorate for instance.


I do not know the full mechanism, currently, but I am aware that
customs regulations were the reasons for holdups from Europe before
the EU.

they were

buy they won't be reinvented just for the sake of it (if they do it to us,
we will do it to them)

logistics has changed in the past 30 years

even importation from countries such as Ukraine are a million times easier
than 30 years ago

Everything is done by pre-authorization on computer

as long as there is no reasons for the customs official to suspect that
what's in the truck is not what's on the manifest, you get waved through.
And when I say suspect that "there's the wrong thing in the truck" I mean
something fundamentally illegal such as guns, drugs or people. Not, out of
spec squeaky rubber ducks instead of in spec squeaky rubber ducks.

tim

Dissapointing, I used to find that ferry travel, or at least
disembarkation was so much faster when we had customs :-(

AB

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 13:11:15 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 09:08:19 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 10:34:53 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote
in
message ...
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


the same right that they have if the USA (or China) import it directly
to
them

that it doesn't comply with local product standards requirements

tim


Which is why customs will be needed,

but we don't have that system at the moment with imports from ROW

ROW?

We do have customs, I assume that technically we have some level of
customs intervention even with traffic from the EU, otherwise there
would be no blue channel at airports.

Customers checks are for the purposes of collecting duty, not checking
against product standards.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in you choice of words. I am happy to
use the term customs checks for this process as long as you understand
that
collecting duty and standards compliance are two distinct and separate
tasks

Commercial importation is the same

manifests are read so that duty can be assessed.

Individual boxes are not opened so that product can be tested for product
compliance.

Hopefully we will have agreed an FTA so that there is no need for any duty
to be assessed and that part will be dispensed with too.

Customs does seem to have a low involvement now, at one time half the
type of stuff I order from Ebay would be opened and I think it was
over £12-00 in value before money had to be sent, but they never
failed to bill One.

domestic importation has been seen to cost them more than they collect

unless they suspect importation of an illegal substance you will often get
away with it.

I notice that the stuff that comes directly from China is labelled up
"samples" or suchlike, makes a change from "used clothing left after
holiday".

Even posting houseplants to Ireland was a customs holdup, I seem to
recollect it wasn't straight duty though, it was an "import licence".

This wasn't a payment of duty, this was payment for a right to import
a specific type of product. i.e compliance.

The actual costs was miniscule, but I remember the balls of dried
earth that fell from the package when it was finally delivered.

Maybe the issuing department was the ministry of agriculture or
suchlike, but the interception was done by customs.

We have a system of checking product compliance at point of sale
(usually
initiated by extra-governmental bodies such as consumer advice
organizations)

Because the theory that, just because a product has come from inside the
EU
it must automatically comply (because all EU companies are good boys who
will followed the rules) is incorrect.

The two biggest scandals of broken standards in that past 10 years, the
beef
that was really horse and Dieselgate were both perpetrated by companies
from
INSIDE the EU, so that method of checking at point of sale cannot be
dismantled and replaced with checks at point of entry..

if a product line is not in
keeping with internal standards, trading cannot continue unimpeded.

Of course it can.

It is. Try buying sodium chlorate or a 2.5kW domestic vacuum.

and this is enforced at point of sale

what point are you making?

Trading in the items is impeded, I would have to go to a lot of effort
to try to obtain sodium chlorate for instance.

So nothing will change

If it can't legally be imported now. It wont legally be importable
afterwards

Now, if someone wants to smuggle the goods in there is no-one to stop them

after we have left if someone wants to smuggle the goods in there will be a
people available to stop them.

But I will lay odds of a billion to one that they won't look inside every
lorry to see if there is any sodium chlorate inside it.

Because we currently have no border checks the mechanism for enforcing non
availability of sodium chlorate is by trading standards enforcing the rules
at point of sale.

has been for years.

we aren't going to change that just because we now have officials at the
border checking manifests. The cost-reward ratio sits in the wrong place.

tim

On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 13:54:11 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 13:11:15 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 09:08:19 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 10:34:53 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote
in
message ...
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


the same right that they have if the USA (or China) import it directly
to
them

that it doesn't comply with local product standards requirements

tim


Which is why customs will be needed,

but we don't have that system at the moment with imports from ROW

ROW?

We do have customs, I assume that technically we have some level of
customs intervention even with traffic from the EU, otherwise there
would be no blue channel at airports.

Customers checks are for the purposes of collecting duty, not checking
against product standards.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in you choice of words. I am happy to
use the term customs checks for this process as long as you understand
that
collecting duty and standards compliance are two distinct and separate
tasks

Commercial importation is the same

manifests are read so that duty can be assessed.

Individual boxes are not opened so that product can be tested for product
compliance.

Hopefully we will have agreed an FTA so that there is no need for any duty
to be assessed and that part will be dispensed with too.

Customs does seem to have a low involvement now, at one time half the
type of stuff I order from Ebay would be opened and I think it was
over £12-00 in value before money had to be sent, but they never
failed to bill One.

domestic importation has been seen to cost them more than they collect

unless they suspect importation of an illegal substance you will often get
away with it.

I notice that the stuff that comes directly from China is labelled up
"samples" or suchlike, makes a change from "used clothing left after
holiday".

Even posting houseplants to Ireland was a customs holdup, I seem to
recollect it wasn't straight duty though, it was an "import licence".

This wasn't a payment of duty, this was payment for a right to import
a specific type of product. i.e compliance.

The actual costs was miniscule, but I remember the balls of dried
earth that fell from the package when it was finally delivered.

Maybe the issuing department was the ministry of agriculture or
suchlike, but the interception was done by customs.

We have a system of checking product compliance at point of sale
(usually
initiated by extra-governmental bodies such as consumer advice
organizations)

Because the theory that, just because a product has come from inside the
EU
it must automatically comply (because all EU companies are good boys who
will followed the rules) is incorrect.

The two biggest scandals of broken standards in that past 10 years, the
beef
that was really horse and Dieselgate were both perpetrated by companies
from
INSIDE the EU, so that method of checking at point of sale cannot be
dismantled and replaced with checks at point of entry..

if a product line is not in
keeping with internal standards, trading cannot continue unimpeded.

Of course it can.

It is. Try buying sodium chlorate or a 2.5kW domestic vacuum.

and this is enforced at point of sale

what point are you making?

Trading in the items is impeded, I would have to go to a lot of effort
to try to obtain sodium chlorate for instance.

So nothing will change

If it can't legally be imported now. It wont legally be importable
afterwards

Now, if someone wants to smuggle the goods in there is no-one to stop them

after we have left if someone wants to smuggle the goods in there will be a
people available to stop them.

But I will lay odds of a billion to one that they won't look inside every
lorry to see if there is any sodium chlorate inside it.

Because we currently have no border checks the mechanism for enforcing non
availability of sodium chlorate is by trading standards enforcing the rules
at point of sale.

has been for years.

we aren't going to change that just because we now have officials at the
border checking manifests. The cost-reward ratio sits in the wrong place.

tim

Oh well at least in our fine new country we won't have the problem
with migrant stowaways from Calais.

The French might have concerns about vagrants that have found their
way down to Dover though :-)

AB

In article ,
says...

I recollect VHS VCR's coming through France had to be
opened, inspected and recorded before being shipped on to
us.


Hardly.

Machines from the Far East would have been shipped by sea
direct to the UK and imports from Holland and Germany would
have been shipped through Dutch and Belgian ports - no need to
go anywhere near France!

What you are getting mixed up with was the French using the
most devious means possible deter imports from damaging the
business of their own manufacturers.

THeir TV market had ben protected by the use, first, of their
unique 819-line system (in the same way as our 405-line system
protected the UK market) and later by the use of the SECAM
colour system.

However, VCRs didn't fit into this protectionist mechanism so
another way had to be sought. What they did was to choose a
point as far away from any port or border as possible - from
memory, the site of a disused mine in central France and set
up a Customs post solely for the import of VCRs. So, any
imports had to travel halfway across France to the post where,
no doubt, the French worked at a very leisurely way to incur
the maximum level of delay, to befire being tken to their
eventual destination which may well have been the poibt that
they'd entered the country in the first place.

The effect of all this was to push the cost of all these
imported VCRs to artificially high level.

The French were very good at this before the EU instituted its
open border policy. Another example was diesel fuel which was
taxed at a much higher level than in neighbouring countries.

Coaches and lorries entering France were only permitted a
maximum of 110 litres of fuel and what a Belgian coach driver
described to me as the French Flying Patrol would stop
vehicles at random and dip the tank. The penalty for having
excess fuel without proof that it had been bought in France
was a very stiff fine - payable, in cash - on the spot!

The day after he told me this we were stopped a short distance
from the border as we were returning to Belgium but there were
no problems!

This was in the days of two colour typewriter ribbons and I
later noticed his worksheet for the day had the following - in
red - typed right across the middle of it:

Niet meer dan 110 liter gasoil in Frankrijk moeten worden
genomen. Vergeet niet!

I think you can get the gist of that!!




--

Terry

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 13:11:15 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 09:08:19 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 10:34:53 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.


https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...n-swipe-at-eu-
over-leaked-brexit-documents-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


the same right that they have if the USA (or China) import it directly
to
them

that it doesn't comply with local product standards requirements

tim


Which is why customs will be needed,

but we don't have that system at the moment with imports from ROW

ROW?

We do have customs, I assume that technically we have some level of
customs intervention even with traffic from the EU, otherwise there
would be no blue channel at airports.

Customers checks are for the purposes of collecting duty, not checking
against product standards.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in you choice of words. I am happy to
use the term customs checks for this process as long as you understand that
collecting duty and standards compliance are two distinct and separate tasks

Commercial importation is the same

manifests are read so that duty can be assessed.

Individual boxes are not opened so that product can be tested for product
compliance.

Hopefully we will have agreed an FTA so that there is no need for any duty
to be assessed and that part will be dispensed with too.

Customs does seem to have a low involvement now, at one time half the
type of stuff I order from Ebay would be opened and I think it was
over £12-00 in value before money had to be sent, but they never
failed to bill One.

domestic importation has been seen to cost them more than they collect

unless they suspect importation of an illegal substance you will often get
away with it.

I notice that the stuff that comes directly from China is labelled up
"samples" or suchlike, makes a change from "used clothing left after
holiday".

Even posting houseplants to Ireland was a customs holdup, I seem to
recollect it wasn't straight duty though, it was an "import licence".

This wasn't a payment of duty, this was payment for a right to import
a specific type of product. i.e compliance.

The actual costs was miniscule, but I remember the balls of dried
earth that fell from the package when it was finally delivered.

Maybe the issuing department was the ministry of agriculture or
suchlike, but the interception was done by customs.

We have a system of checking product compliance at point of sale (usually
initiated by extra-governmental bodies such as consumer advice
organizations)

Because the theory that, just because a product has come from inside the
EU
it must automatically comply (because all EU companies are good boys who
will followed the rules) is incorrect.

The two biggest scandals of broken standards in that past 10 years, the
beef
that was really horse and Dieselgate were both perpetrated by companies
from
INSIDE the EU, so that method of checking at point of sale cannot be
dismantled and replaced with checks at point of entry..

if a product line is not in
keeping with internal standards, trading cannot continue unimpeded.

Of course it can.

It is. Try buying sodium chlorate or a 2.5kW domestic vacuum.

and this is enforced at point of sale

what point are you making?

Trading in the items is impeded, I would have to go to a lot of effort
to try to obtain sodium chlorate for instance.

Unless you want a prolonged 14 day interview in an unidentified cellar,
with a lawyer who is on the other side and forbidden to tell you what
you are accused of, I advise against it.

(Home synthesis is probably safer.)


--

Roger Hayter

On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 19:19:51 +0000, (Roger Hayter)
wrote:

Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 13:11:15 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 09:08:19 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 10:34:53 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.


https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...n-swipe-at-eu-
over-leaked-brexit-documents-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


the same right that they have if the USA (or China) import it directly
to
them

that it doesn't comply with local product standards requirements

tim


Which is why customs will be needed,

but we don't have that system at the moment with imports from ROW

ROW?

We do have customs, I assume that technically we have some level of
customs intervention even with traffic from the EU, otherwise there
would be no blue channel at airports.

Customers checks are for the purposes of collecting duty, not checking
against product standards.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in you choice of words. I am happy to
use the term customs checks for this process as long as you understand that
collecting duty and standards compliance are two distinct and separate tasks

Commercial importation is the same

manifests are read so that duty can be assessed.

Individual boxes are not opened so that product can be tested for product
compliance.

Hopefully we will have agreed an FTA so that there is no need for any duty
to be assessed and that part will be dispensed with too.

Customs does seem to have a low involvement now, at one time half the
type of stuff I order from Ebay would be opened and I think it was
over £12-00 in value before money had to be sent, but they never
failed to bill One.

domestic importation has been seen to cost them more than they collect

unless they suspect importation of an illegal substance you will often get
away with it.

I notice that the stuff that comes directly from China is labelled up
"samples" or suchlike, makes a change from "used clothing left after
holiday".

Even posting houseplants to Ireland was a customs holdup, I seem to
recollect it wasn't straight duty though, it was an "import licence".

This wasn't a payment of duty, this was payment for a right to import
a specific type of product. i.e compliance.

The actual costs was miniscule, but I remember the balls of dried
earth that fell from the package when it was finally delivered.

Maybe the issuing department was the ministry of agriculture or
suchlike, but the interception was done by customs.

We have a system of checking product compliance at point of sale (usually
initiated by extra-governmental bodies such as consumer advice
organizations)

Because the theory that, just because a product has come from inside the
EU
it must automatically comply (because all EU companies are good boys who
will followed the rules) is incorrect.

The two biggest scandals of broken standards in that past 10 years, the
beef
that was really horse and Dieselgate were both perpetrated by companies
from
INSIDE the EU, so that method of checking at point of sale cannot be
dismantled and replaced with checks at point of entry..

if a product line is not in
keeping with internal standards, trading cannot continue unimpeded.

Of course it can.

It is. Try buying sodium chlorate or a 2.5kW domestic vacuum.

and this is enforced at point of sale

what point are you making?

Trading in the items is impeded, I would have to go to a lot of effort
to try to obtain sodium chlorate for instance.

Unless you want a prolonged 14 day interview in an unidentified cellar,
with a lawyer who is on the other side and forbidden to tell you what
you are accused of, I advise against it.

(Home synthesis is probably safer.)

I bought some sodium nitrate from Amazon for tree stump removal.
I still get ads for things like aluminium powder, magnesium ribbon and
the like popping up when I log in.

If my interest in "pyrotechnics" has been "deduced" by Amazon, I hate
to think what other databases I might be included on :-(

'Wouldn,t mind but by the time I got around to the job, I found it was
rotten anyway. Did't even need a spade.


AB

In article , Archibald
Tarquin Blenkinsopp writes
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 10:34:53 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.


https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...swipe-at-eu-ov
er-leaked-brexit-documents-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


the same right that they have if the USA (or China) import it directly to
them

that it doesn't comply with local product standards requirements

tim


Which is why customs will be needed, if a product line is not in
keeping with internal standards, trading cannot continue unimpeded.
As Fox, Davis and co think selling the EU carcinogenic crud that we
have imported from the US and similar adventures is a minor
technicality not worthy of any action, it just shows the level of
stupidity and ignorance they posess.

AB




Well they seem to mange quite well on the US/Canada border.
--
bert

On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 20:26:34 +0000, bert wrote:

In article , Archibald
Tarquin Blenkinsopp writes
On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 10:34:53 -0000, "tim..."
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.


https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...swipe-at-eu-ov
er-leaked-brexit-documents-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


the same right that they have if the USA (or China) import it directly to
them

that it doesn't comply with local product standards requirements

tim


Which is why customs will be needed, if a product line is not in
keeping with internal standards, trading cannot continue unimpeded.
As Fox, Davis and co think selling the EU carcinogenic crud that we
have imported from the US and similar adventures is a minor
technicality not worthy of any action, it just shows the level of
stupidity and ignorance they posess.

AB




Well they seem to mange quite well on the US/Canada border.
Yes indeed they do,

They provide all sorts of info on how to prepay duty and plan for
minimal wait times at the border crossings.

I can't see the same happening at Dover, it would be just one almighty
mass of vehicles.

The US and canada have the advantage that there are only three main
languages to communicate with. Dover has traffic from all over Europe
and beyond.

Your point was?

AB

On 08/02/2018 21:41, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


Well Davis, I don't want the garbage, so I don't blame the rest of
Europe one bit!!

You're a typical bad loser Remoaner.

Your type is why so many voted for Brexit.

On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:14:04 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 08/02/2018 21:41, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


Well Davis, I don't want the garbage, so I don't blame the rest of
Europe one bit!!

You're a typical bad loser Remoaner.

Your type is why so many voted for Brexit.

By the 'so many' you actually mean the 4% who specifically voted for
Brexit? A landslide result if there ever wasn't one.

The 1/3rd of the electorate who voted for something pretty well
unknown.

How many (of your fanatic type) would accept your vote actually was
taken as the request for a soft brexit when you might have to swallow
*all* thing very things you wanted to run away from?

Brilliant planning ... not!

All I can imagine is you (Fanatic Brexiteers) are just on a wind-up
here, you really can't be serious?

Cheers, T i m

On 10/02/2018 21:26, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:14:04 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 08/02/2018 21:41, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


Well Davis, I don't want the garbage, so I don't blame the rest of
Europe one bit!!

You're a typical bad loser Remoaner.

Your type is why so many voted for Brexit.

By the 'so many' you actually mean the 4% who specifically voted for
Brexit? A landslide result if there ever wasn't one.

8% more voted for Brexit than remain.

The 1/3rd of the electorate who voted for something pretty well
unknown.

That ended in a modest majority, perhaps you should be asking why they
voted Brexit. Calling them academically challenged (like Tory voters)
shows you don't want to know.

How many (of your fanatic type) would accept your vote actually was
taken as the request for a soft brexit when you might have to swallow
*all* thing very things you wanted to run away from?

All things have to start somewhere. Soft Brexit with limited movement of
labour is fine.

Brilliant planning ... not!

I would say it was a lack of planning from politicians, to **** off the
country and make false promises of house building and immigration. What
did David Cameron say about desired immigration levels?

It might have helped if the EU didn't give him a bloody nose before the
referendum.

All I can imagine is you (Fanatic Brexiteers) are just on a wind-up
here, you really can't be serious?

That shows how clueless you are. I assume you haven't worked for a while
and have a house that has accumulated in value from housing demand.

On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:14:04 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 08/02/2018 21:41, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


Well Davis, I don't want the garbage, so I don't blame the rest of
Europe one bit!!

You're a typical bad loser Remoaner.

Are you for real?

I wouldn't want the substandard garbage myself, Thicko's all over the
country can leave the UK open to whateve rubbish remains when the
production costs are shaved. It does not mean that I have to consume
the crud.

I don't blame Europe for trying to isolate themselves from the cut
price, deregulated garbage either.

Your type is why so many voted for Brexit.

I wasn't aware that it was an issue? I doubt that many of the dimwits
thought things through to the point of consumption, they were too busy
flag waving and denouncing migrants.

Anyway I want to take control of what I eat and I want to know that
the rest of the products I buy are of an acceptable quality.

If the idiots think there is something wrong with that, I can't help
it. Wasnt it what the IQ zero's voted for? Taking control?

As I pointed out elsewhere, the Brexit voters wouldn't be bothered
about food quality anyway, you are a classic example, you are
attempting to swing everything around to for and against. You are
incapable of looking into the facts.

AB

On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:36:06 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 10/02/2018 21:26, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:14:04 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 08/02/2018 21:41, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


Well Davis, I don't want the garbage, so I don't blame the rest of
Europe one bit!!

You're a typical bad loser Remoaner.

Your type is why so many voted for Brexit.

By the 'so many' you actually mean the 4% who specifically voted for
Brexit? A landslide result if there ever wasn't one.

8% more voted for Brexit than remain.

The 1/3rd of the electorate who voted for something pretty well
unknown.

That ended in a modest majority, perhaps you should be asking why they
voted Brexit. Calling them academically challenged (like Tory voters)
shows you don't want to know.


There was a survey, they did find that the areas that voted leave had
a greater number of thick people.

https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...-union/488780/

Since then the Brexiteers have been doing everything they can to
consolidate that finding.

It isn't really rocket science, putting oneself in debt for decades,
for no practical gain whatsoever does take a phenomenal degree of
stupidity.



AB

On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:36:06 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

snip

By the 'so many' you actually mean the 4% who specifically voted for
Brexit? A landslide result if there ever wasn't one.

8% more voted for Brexit than remain.

Yeah, 52 over 48, that's 8 alright.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/e...rendum/results

The 1/3rd of the electorate who voted for something pretty well
unknown.

That ended in a modest majority, perhaps you should be asking why they
voted Brexit. Calling them academically challenged (like Tory voters)
shows you don't want to know.

I have asked and none of them have come up with any facts, only
fantasy and BS. Wanna give it a go?

How many (of your fanatic type) would accept your vote actually was
taken as the request for a soft brexit when you might have to swallow
*all* thing very things you wanted to run away from?

All things have to start somewhere. Soft Brexit with limited movement of
labour is fine.

And you think that's what your fellow fanatical Brexiteers 'voted for'
do you? Or maybe you all voted for something different so it will be
interesting to see how well they manage to placate that range.

And what do you think the 'limited movement of labour' is going to do?
It's foxes and rabbits out there mate, if there are no jobs then there
won't be people 'migrating (not immigrating note) to fill them.

Brilliant planning ... not!

I would say it was a lack of planning from politicians,

Well duh, nothing to do with the EU then?

to **** off the
country and make false promises of house building and immigration.

So it's conspiracy theories now ... or can you offer any proof for
that?

What
did David Cameron say about desired immigration levels?

No idea, I don't listen to any of their BS and empty promises.

It might have helped if the EU didn't give him a bloody nose before the
referendum.

Did they? Or is it likely to be no different to what we could end up
with after the 'negotiations'?

All I can imagine is you (Fanatic Brexiteers) are just on a wind-up
here, you really can't be serious?

That shows how clueless you are.

Well, me and the other 2/3rds of the electorate apparently ...

I assume you haven't worked for a while

I'm not sure what that's got to do with us leaving the EU?

and have a house that has accumulated in value from housing demand.

Irrelevant. Houses have always accumulated in value and I can't ever
remember a time when there were loads standing empty anywhere ... till
now of course.

http://metro.co.uk/2018/02/03/amazin...ust-1-7283928/

http://www.emptyhomes.com/

"Latest Government data suggests that there are over 200,000 homes
that have been empty for over six months."

That might take the edge off at least?

But hey, many of the migrant workers who have come here to work , pay
taxes and for our pensions may well choose to migrate home again and
leave the older immigrants and their families who have come here
though our existing immigration and customs controls and may not be so
keen / able to work to take over? Or not.

Cheers, T i m

On 10/02/2018 22:05, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:36:06 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 10/02/2018 21:26, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:14:04 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 08/02/2018 21:41, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


Well Davis, I don't want the garbage, so I don't blame the rest of
Europe one bit!!

You're a typical bad loser Remoaner.

Your type is why so many voted for Brexit.

By the 'so many' you actually mean the 4% who specifically voted for
Brexit? A landslide result if there ever wasn't one.

8% more voted for Brexit than remain.

The 1/3rd of the electorate who voted for something pretty well
unknown.

That ended in a modest majority, perhaps you should be asking why they
voted Brexit. Calling them academically challenged (like Tory voters)
shows you don't want to know.


There was a survey, they did find that the areas that voted leave had
a greater number of thick people.

Similar survey of areas of Tory voters find the same result.

No survey has found that Brexit areas are thick. What they did find is
that they are generally older and subsequently of lower academic
qualifications.

If you can find a measure of IQ correlation with Brexit voting then I
will be impressed.

https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...-union/488780/

Since then the Brexiteers have been doing everything they can to
consolidate that finding.

It isn't really rocket science, putting oneself in debt for decades,
for no practical gain whatsoever does take a phenomenal degree of
stupidity.

Not sure what you are trying to say. Most debt has been recently been
created by the University system and encouraged by Tory and LibDems.

On 10/02/2018 22:34, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:36:06 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

snip

By the 'so many' you actually mean the 4% who specifically voted for
Brexit? A landslide result if there ever wasn't one.

8% more voted for Brexit than remain.

Yeah, 52 over 48, that's 8 alright.

Yes, 8% of 48 is the '4' you might have been looking for.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/e...rendum/results

The 1/3rd of the electorate who voted for something pretty well
unknown.

That ended in a modest majority, perhaps you should be asking why they
voted Brexit. Calling them academically challenged (like Tory voters)
shows you don't want to know.

I have asked and none of them have come up with any facts, only
fantasy and BS. Wanna give it a go?

That depends on if you're asking real questions or point scoring.

How many (of your fanatic type) would accept your vote actually was
taken as the request for a soft brexit when you might have to swallow
*all* thing very things you wanted to run away from?

All things have to start somewhere. Soft Brexit with limited movement of
labour is fine.

And you think that's what your fellow fanatical Brexiteers 'voted for'
do you? Or maybe you all voted for something different so it will be
interesting to see how well they manage to placate that range.

I wouldn't have called myself fanatical, 99.9% of Brexiters. Unlike many
here I have never started a topic on Brexit.

Perhaps it's more a loser Remoaner thing.

And what do you think the 'limited movement of labour' is going to do?
It's foxes and rabbits out there mate, if there are no jobs then there
won't be people 'migrating (not immigrating note) to fill them.

Then the laws of supply and demand take over. Its a Remoaner thing to
conveniently deny this.

Brilliant planning ... not!

I would say it was a lack of planning from politicians,

Well duh, nothing to do with the EU then?

Not really. The UK could have stopped the expansion of the EU with
developing Eastern European countries and agreeing to immediate free
movement of labour.

to **** off the
country and make false promises of house building and immigration.

So it's conspiracy theories now ... or can you offer any proof for
that?

What is the purpose of David Cameron promising to keep immigration to
30,000 or so and in reality 300,000 per year come here to work.

What
did David Cameron say about desired immigration levels?

No idea, I don't listen to any of their BS and empty promises.

Perhaps you should and be enlightened. That is another reason for
Brexit. An end to the BS.

It might have helped if the EU didn't give him a bloody nose before the
referendum.

Did they? Or is it likely to be no different to what we could end up
with after the 'negotiations'?

You are entitled to your opinion, misguided or otherwise.

All I can imagine is you (Fanatic Brexiteers) are just on a wind-up
here, you really can't be serious?

That shows how clueless you are.

Well, me and the other 2/3rds of the electorate apparently ...
Its the ones who vote that count, best get used to it.

I assume you haven't worked for a while

I'm not sure what that's got to do with us leaving the EU?

A great deal, it means you don't understand the consequence of
immigration of wages.

and have a house that has accumulated in value from housing demand.

Irrelevant.

Its very relevant. Its another reason why people voted Brexit. Why are
you in denial why so many voted for Brexit. You are doing very nicely,
and those trying to get on the housing ladder aren't.

Houses have always accumulated in value and I can't ever
remember a time when there were loads standing empty anywhere ... till
now of course.

They have accumulated in value in relation to wages. The past 10 years
has seen unprecedented house-price wage ratio.

http://metro.co.uk/2018/02/03/amazin...ust-1-7283928/

http://www.emptyhomes.com/

"Latest Government data suggests that there are over 200,000 homes
that have been empty for over six months."

That might take the edge off at least?

I have no problem in the likes of business rates and other inducements
for businesses to move to these areas. However most transport subsidies
tend to be centred on a few cities and these areas are in a downward spiral.

I also have no problems with escalating rates for empty houses.

But hey, many of the migrant workers who have come here to work , pay
taxes and for our pensions may well choose to migrate home again and
leave the older immigrants and their families who have come here
though our existing immigration and customs controls and may not be so
keen / able to work to take over? Or not.

And create the need for in-work benefits and top up Housing Benefits.

On 10/02/2018 21:54, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:14:04 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 08/02/2018 21:41, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


Well Davis, I don't want the garbage, so I don't blame the rest of
Europe one bit!!

You're a typical bad loser Remoaner.

Are you for real?

I wouldn't want the substandard garbage myself, Thicko's all over the
country can leave the UK open to whateve rubbish remains when the
production costs are shaved. It does not mean that I have to consume
the crud.

I don't blame Europe for trying to isolate themselves from the cut
price, deregulated garbage either.

Your type is why so many voted for Brexit.

I wasn't aware that it was an issue? I doubt that many of the dimwits
thought things through to the point of consumption, they were too busy
flag waving and denouncing migrants.

Anyway I want to take control of what I eat and I want to know that
the rest of the products I buy are of an acceptable quality.

If the idiots think there is something wrong with that, I can't help
it. Wasnt it what the IQ zero's voted for? Taking control?

As I pointed out elsewhere, the Brexit voters wouldn't be bothered
about food quality anyway, you are a classic example, you are
attempting to swing everything around to for and against. You are
incapable of looking into the facts.

You come across as a myopic poor loser Remoaner who believes his own
rhetoric.

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 12:04:53 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

snip

I have asked and none of them have come up with any facts, only
fantasy and BS. Wanna give it a go?

That depends on if you're asking real questions or point scoring.

Given I don't have a dog in this fight, I have only / ever been
interested in the facts mate. In fact, it's the whole crux of my main
discussion. However, I don't count someone's 'hunches' or opinion,
hopes and desires as facts. So, if that doesn't completely tie your
hands, I would really like an answer please (even if it's only one
particular Brexiteers version of it).

snip

And you think that's what your fellow fanatical Brexiteers 'voted for'
do you? Or maybe you all voted for something different so it will be
interesting to see how well they manage to placate that range.

I wouldn't have called myself fanatical, 99.9% of Brexiters.

But I'm not sure you would be in a position to judge that.

Unlike many
here I have never started a topic on Brexit.

Fair enough. However (devils advocate) that may just mean you are more
respectful of the group than not a fanatical Brexiteer.

Perhaps it's more a loser Remoaner thing.

'Remoaner', another classic Brexiteer comment. If I called you a
Brexsh1teer than your use of 'Remoaner' might be considered
reasonable.

And what do you think the 'limited movement of labour' is going to do?
It's foxes and rabbits out there mate, if there are no jobs then there
won't be people 'migrating (not immigrating note) to fill them.

Then the laws of supply and demand take over.

Yes, I just said that ...

Its a Remoaner thing to
conveniently deny this.

They don't and I just suggested it.

Brilliant planning ... not!

I would say it was a lack of planning from politicians,

Well duh, nothing to do with the EU then?

Not really. The UK could have stopped the expansion of the EU with
developing Eastern European countries and agreeing to immediate free
movement of labour.

Quite. Something we certainly can't influence when *outside* the EU.

to **** off the
country and make false promises of house building and immigration.

So it's conspiracy theories now ... or can you offer any proof for
that?

What is the purpose of David Cameron promising to keep immigration to
30,000 or so and in reality 300,000 per year come here to work.

Pass. I'm not gullible enough to believe *any* of their promises (and
why I couldn't vote in the EU referendum).

What
did David Cameron say about desired immigration levels?

No idea, I don't listen to any of their BS and empty promises.

Perhaps you should and be enlightened.

By listening to BS?

That is another reason for
Brexit. An end to the BS.

Yeah, that seems to make sense (not).

It might have helped if the EU didn't give him a bloody nose before the
referendum.

Did they? Or is it likely to be no different to what we could end up
with after the 'negotiations'?

You are entitled to your opinion, misguided or otherwise.

It was a question mate. Try to keep up. Fancy actually answering it
this time though?

All I can imagine is you (Fanatic Brexiteers) are just on a wind-up
here, you really can't be serious?

That shows how clueless you are.

Well, me and the other 2/3rds of the electorate apparently ...

Its the ones who vote that count, best get used to it.

Get used to your version of democracy and ignoring the actual 'will of
the people' you mean?

You go home and say to your family ... Hands up who wants to go on
holiday to Spain this year ... and only 1 of the three of you put your
hands up, do you all then go on holiday to Spain?

I know if it were you posing the question you would, if it were me
there would be a discussion about alternatives that at least 2/3rd of
us might agree on.

I assume you haven't worked for a while

I'm not sure what that's got to do with us leaving the EU?

A great deal, it means you don't understand the consequence of
immigration of wages.

Really? You think that just because I've stopped working I no longer
understand anything about working? That I don't have children, friends
or family that are working. Every time you come out with anything like
this as an attempt to diminish someone else's opinion or understanding
of something you further demonstrate you may well be a left brainer
and so not to be trusted with any decisions involving human beings
that are complex. And that's not an insult / slur, it's an
observation.

and have a house that has accumulated in value from housing demand.

Irrelevant.

Its very relevant. Its another reason why people voted Brexit.

Cite?

Why are
you in denial why so many voted for Brexit.

I am fully aware of the reasons why people voted either way but most
of them can be proven to be bogus. I don't know (personally) of a
single person who voted for Brexit because of house prices.

You are doing very nicely,

By living in the house I bought 40 years ago?

and those trying to get on the housing ladder aren't.

And that has been the same long before any supposed impact because of
the EU. Please try to stick to facts.

Houses have always accumulated in value and I can't ever
remember a time when there were loads standing empty anywhere ... till
now of course.

They have accumulated in value in relation to wages. The past 10 years
has seen unprecedented house-price wage ratio.

See above. If you can sell every house you build, why aren't all the
developers jumping on the bandwagon?

http://metro.co.uk/2018/02/03/amazin...ust-1-7283928/

http://www.emptyhomes.com/

"Latest Government data suggests that there are over 200,000 homes
that have been empty for over six months."

That might take the edge off at least?

I have no problem in the likes of business rates and other inducements
for businesses to move to these areas. However most transport subsidies
tend to be centred on a few cities and these areas are in a downward spiral.

But not everone works, or needs to travel to work?

I also have no problems with escalating rates for empty houses.

So why didn't we try that first before throwing the baby out with the
bath water?

But hey, many of the migrant workers who have come here to work , pay
taxes and for our pensions may well choose to migrate home again and
leave the older immigrants and their families who have come here
though our existing immigration and customs controls and may not be so
keen / able to work to take over? Or not.

And create the need for in-work benefits and top up Housing Benefits.

Quite. Immigration we have and have had *full control* over since the
beginning?

Cheers, T i m

On 11/02/2018 12:04, Fredxx wrote:


I wouldn't have called myself fanatical, 99.9% of Brexiters. Unlike many
here I have never started a topic on Brexit.

But you do insist on repeating the brexit lies on every thread.

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 12:07:43 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 10/02/2018 21:54, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:14:04 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 08/02/2018 21:41, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


Well Davis, I don't want the garbage, so I don't blame the rest of
Europe one bit!!

You're a typical bad loser Remoaner.

Are you for real?

I wouldn't want the substandard garbage myself, Thicko's all over the
country can leave the UK open to whateve rubbish remains when the
production costs are shaved. It does not mean that I have to consume
the crud.

I don't blame Europe for trying to isolate themselves from the cut
price, deregulated garbage either.

Your type is why so many voted for Brexit.

I wasn't aware that it was an issue? I doubt that many of the dimwits
thought things through to the point of consumption, they were too busy
flag waving and denouncing migrants.

Anyway I want to take control of what I eat and I want to know that
the rest of the products I buy are of an acceptable quality.

If the idiots think there is something wrong with that, I can't help
it. Wasnt it what the IQ zero's voted for? Taking control?

As I pointed out elsewhere, the Brexit voters wouldn't be bothered
about food quality anyway, you are a classic example, you are
attempting to swing everything around to for and against. You are
incapable of looking into the facts.

You come across as a myopic poor loser Remoaner who believes his own
rhetoric.

That's impressive, the whole argument now that you have screwed the
country is not, how do we sort the disaster out, let's just criticise
anyone that doesn't go along with the stupid farce.

You and your ilk have destroyed Britain, not only that, you have
burdened generations to come with the task of having to pay for your
stupidity.

AB

In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
No survey has found that Brexit areas are thick. What they did find is
that they are generally older and subsequently of lower academic
qualifications.

Is the current vogue for every young person gaining a meja degree actually
doing any good for the country?

--
*Black holes are where God divided by zero *

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

In article ,
Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
You come across as a myopic poor loser Remoaner who believes his own
rhetoric.

That's impressive, the whole argument now that you have screwed the
country is not, how do we sort the disaster out, let's just criticise
anyone that doesn't go along with the stupid farce.

As old as the hills. Most recently fervently adopted by Trump. Shoot the
messenger who brings bad news.

--
*In "Casablanca", Humphrey Bogart never said "Play it again, Sam" *

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

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 11:29:54 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 10/02/2018 22:05, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:36:06 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 10/02/2018 21:26, T i m wrote:
On Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:14:04 +0000, Fredxx wrote:

On 08/02/2018 21:41, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
Once again the idiots advertise their complete ignorance of how the
single market works.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/poli...-a3762021.html

When Britain becomes a pathway for every bit of substandard crud the
US wants to throw at us, what right has the rest of the EU to refuse
it??


Well Davis, I don't want the garbage, so I don't blame the rest of
Europe one bit!!

You're a typical bad loser Remoaner.

Your type is why so many voted for Brexit.

By the 'so many' you actually mean the 4% who specifically voted for
Brexit? A landslide result if there ever wasn't one.

8% more voted for Brexit than remain.

The 1/3rd of the electorate who voted for something pretty well
unknown.

That ended in a modest majority, perhaps you should be asking why they
voted Brexit. Calling them academically challenged (like Tory voters)
shows you don't want to know.


There was a survey, they did find that the areas that voted leave had
a greater number of thick people.

Similar survey of areas of Tory voters find the same result.

No survey has found that Brexit areas are thick. What they did find is
that they are generally older and subsequently of lower academic
qualifications.

They didn't actually do an IQ test, but it's safe to assume that those
without qualifications were as a group, not quite as up to speed
mentally.

Unqualified people in general would have jobs that didn't require a
lot of thought or mentally challenging response to day to day tasks.

The "use it or lose it" effect.

If you can find a measure of IQ correlation with Brexit voting then I
will be impressed.

Thos that voted leave would be fairly definitive.

https://www.theatlantic.com/internat...-union/488780/

Since then the Brexiteers have been doing everything they can to
consolidate that finding.

It isn't really rocket science, putting oneself in debt for decades,
for no practical gain whatsoever does take a phenomenal degree of
stupidity.

Not sure what you are trying to say. Most debt has been recently been
created by the University system and encouraged by Tory and LibDems.

It was actually bankers gambling with money they didn't have.


AB

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 13:09:48 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
No survey has found that Brexit areas are thick. What they did find is
that they are generally older and subsequently of lower academic
qualifications.

Is the current vogue for every young person gaining a meja degree actually
doing any good for the country?

No, In my view a lot of the people coming out of Uni with degree's are
filling jobs that have not traditionally required that level of
qualification. Certainly in the admin section where I work that's what
seems to be happening. The basic job functions have not altered, the
qualifications of those doing the work have increased with nearly all
being degree qualified, where technology has come into play though,
the positions are being filled by experienced people rather than
someone straight from Uni, which gives them a springboard into any new
venture.



The merits of recent degree courses, I'm not able to comment on, but
it's a brilliant system where you can take hundreds of thousands of
unemployed school leavers, keep them off the unemployment register,
get them to pay for three years of further education and burden them
with debt.

When a degree was of value, and not just a means to limit the
interview process, grants were available, a degree was an investment
for the country.

AB

Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

There was a survey, they did find that the areas that voted leave had
a greater number of thick people.

Maybe intelligence is inversely proportional
to the density of Pret a Manger shops? Or vice-versa ...

https://twitter.com/__Gilmour__/status/956985287871213568

In article ,
Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
Is the current vogue for every young person gaining a meja degree
actually doing any good for the country?

No, In my view a lot of the people coming out of Uni with degree's are
filling jobs that have not traditionally required that level of
qualification.

Even more to the point, traditional skills like plumbing, electrics
mechanics etc that were once acquired via an apprenticeship seem to be
looked down upon by many. Resulting in those skills having to be imported
from other countries where blue collar jobs are still desired.

You could also blame industry. Why waste profits training staff when you
can get the taxpayer to do it? No point in planning for the future, when
there are present day shareholders to be satisfied.

--
*America is so advanced that even the chairs are electric.

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

On Saturday, 10 February 2018 21:36:04 UTC, Fredxx wrote:
On 10/02/2018 21:26, T i m wrote:

By the 'so many' you actually mean the 4% who specifically voted for
Brexit? A landslide result if there ever wasn't one.

8% more voted for Brexit than remain.

Only on planet Tim did 4% vote for brexit. The man's a prolific promoter of silly cobblers.


NT

On Saturday, 10 February 2018 22:05:49 UTC, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

It isn't really rocket science, putting oneself in debt for decades,
for no practical gain whatsoever does take a phenomenal degree of
stupidity.

Yep. And that's one thing remaining would give us.

There's no eceonomic win either way, if we stay we get taken to the cleaners and regulated by those not looking out for our interests at all, if we leave we take a hit too, but it's one we're free to recover from.


NT

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 14:56:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
Is the current vogue for every young person gaining a meja degree
actually doing any good for the country?

No, In my view a lot of the people coming out of Uni with degree's are
filling jobs that have not traditionally required that level of
qualification.

Even more to the point, traditional skills like plumbing, electrics
mechanics etc that were once acquired via an apprenticeship seem to be
looked down upon by many. Resulting in those skills having to be imported
from other countries where blue collar jobs are still desired.


You could also blame industry. Why waste profits training staff when you
can get the taxpayer to do it? No point in planning for the future, when
there are present day shareholders to be satisfied.

I agree totally, I would add though that there is another common
approach by employers in the UK, that is a reluctance to train workers
because they will then go to join a competitor, thus wasting the
investment.


And a low regulation transient workforce that can be changed as easy
as One's socks is going to improve things :-)


AB

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 14:43:39 +0000, Andy Burns
wrote:

Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

There was a survey, they did find that the areas that voted leave had
a greater number of thick people.

Maybe intelligence is inversely proportional
to the density of Pret a Manger shops? Or vice-versa ...

https://twitter.com/__Gilmour__/status/956985287871213568

Could be.

I don't use them much, but their operating philosophy as depicted on
the advertising blub on their merchandise seems to imply a bit of
thought and social concience.

At the worst, it allows One to ponder the deeper meanings of life as
one puts one'self outside a tuna buttie.

AB

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 09:46:14 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Saturday, 10 February 2018 21:36:04 UTC, Fredxx wrote:
On 10/02/2018 21:26, T i m wrote:

By the 'so many' you actually mean the 4% who specifically voted for
Brexit? A landslide result if there ever wasn't one.

8% more voted for Brexit than remain.

Only on planet Tim did 4% vote for brexit.

Awww bless.

The man's a prolific promoter of silly cobblers.

And only a literal left brainer would be so confused by such simple
things.

Cheers, T i m