"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"tim..." wrote in message
...

but they can't live or work here once they get here, because
employers/landlords are supposed to check their eligibility

So that seems to be one of the *actual* reasons for people
voting for Brexit, blown to smithereens in one sentence.

which actual reason would that be?

tim

"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"tim..." wrote in message
...

but they can't live or work here once they get here, because
employers/landlords are supposed to check their eligibility

So that seems to be one of the *actual* reasons for people
voting for Brexit, blown to smithereens in one sentence.

Nope, because that isnt the case with the UK still in the EU, stupid.

The reason many people say they voted for Brexit was to
control illegal immigration.

did they?

they are bloody daft then.

that's probably a proxy for "control of immigration of undesirables" (who
happen to be EU citizens and can therefore come here unrestricted)

tim

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:
Otherwise as Dave says the alien EU hordes can pitch up in
Dublin, take a bus to Belfast and catch the next ferry
to Stranraer.

they can

but they can't live or work here once they get here, because
employers/landlords are supposed to check their eligibility

Lots of things are supposed to be done. Like stopping illegal drugs
entering this country. Very successful that one.

That's the enforcement mechanism

Enforcing anything needs policing. And worrying about landlords or
employers doing things cash in hand are going to be somewhat down the list
of priorities.

90% success would be 90% better than we have now

you never expect 100%

tim

On 09/09/2019 09:42, tim... wrote:


"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...


"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"tim..." wrote in message
...

but they can't live or work here once they get here, because
employers/landlords are supposed to check their eligibility

So that seems to be one of the *actual* reasons for people
voting for Brexit, blown to smithereens in one sentence.

Nope, because that isnt the case with the UK still in the EU, stupid.

The reason many people say they voted for Brexit was to
control illegal immigration.

did they?

they are bloody daft then.

Depends on how many [illegal] immigrants present with false EU pasoprts
though.

Actuall 'illegal' immigration was not the issue.
It was to control *EU* immigration. Expecially of those from outside te
EU who turnm up in e.g. Italy, get EU refugee status granted
automatically and head straight for Britain with an italian passport.



that's probably a proxy for "control of immigration of undesirables"
(who happen to be EU citizens and can therefore come here unrestricted)


Exactly.

tim







--
€œIt is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established
authorities are wrong.€�

ۥ Voltaire, The Age of Louis XIV

"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
On 08/09/2019 12:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
The Irish problem is entirely fabricated by the EU / Ireland. At no
point has the UK suggested a hard border. It is Ireland which is
building border check points, not the UK.


OK then. EU workers have free movement to Eire. With no border controls,
they can take a bus to Ulster, and onwards to the UK. Unless we have
controls between Ulster and the mainland. Unacceptable to the DUP.

And, as I have said to you many times, they arrive in the UK as visitors,
without the correct paperwork to gain employment, claim benefits, use the
NHS, rent a home, etc.

but they do have the right paperwork to do those things

an EU passport

On 08/09/2019 22:39, Steve Walker wrote:
On 08/09/2019 10:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 08/09/2019 07:10, Stephen Cole wrote:




Whats the point of all of this, Brian? What do you people genuinely
believe were going to gain from all this upheaval and madness?

Freedom to make our own choices, set our own laws, hold our own
government to account for allowing large numbers of immigrants
overloading already limited resources and infrastructure, reduce the
downward pressure on low-end wages.

We don't seem to have any difficulties setting our own laws. Hasn't
Parliament has just set one (subject to Royal assent on Monday)?

Can we decide on whether we want tracking in our new vehicles? Expensive
safety systems that make only a little difference to safety, but render
vehicles uneconomic to repair after only slight damage? To reduce or
raise import tariffs on certain goods? At what level VAT should be set?
Whether any VAT is due on particular goods? To control immigration? And
the list goes on.

Yes we can make our own laws

I can make my own laws?

I thought laws had to be agreed by the group? I find it hard to
understand why the UK group is *we* and the EU group is *them*?

It seems obvious to me that if we share an environment, laws should be
decided by everyone affected. In a free trade area it also seems obvious
that some laws are required to control the entire free trade area.

VAT is a classic case. Without tariffs on trade between EU states we
need a common VAT rate, and probably redistribution between EU states,
or there will be a race to the bottom.

So yes, I wish I, personally, could make up all the laws that affect me
but I see the benefit of living in a community with shared standards and
rules.

On 09/09/2019 09:31, michael adams wrote:
"Norman Wells" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 08:55, tim... wrote:

we have already published our proposed scale of charges (Norman probably knows where
it is)

and, from examples that have been discussed, for many items the tariffs are much lower
than EU tariffs

It's he

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/t...exit-published

Those tarriffs are for imports. Which can indeed be set by the UK Govt.

Where are the UK Govt projections of the tarriffs likely to be imposed on UK exports ?

Have they been published anywhere ?

They are the tariffs each country applies to imports of any goods.
You'll have to look them up on a country-by-country basis.

The UK, as with all other countries, does not impose any tariffs on its
own exports.

It's how it works.

Or are the Govt secretly hoping that our competitors will somehow take pity on us ?

I think they're secretly hoping you'll start to understand how tariffs work.

On 09/09/2019 10:01, Pancho wrote:
I see the benefit of living in a community with shared standards and rules.

But sadly, none of the downsides.

Or indeed the fact that nothing prevents a sovereign UK from sharing
European standards, and indeed rules.

Except of course the EU...

Consider the possibility that the EU got essentially bought by a cartel
of multinationals and banks who proceeded to run it as a criminal
organisation.

How would you stop it 'from inside'?


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

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

In message , tim...
writes


"michael adams" wrote in message
...



The reason many people say they voted for Brexit was to
control illegal immigration.

did they?
they are bloody daft then.

Indeed. There are occasions when even those LBC presenters who are
highly pro-Brexit cannot avoid having to query some the 'unreasoned'
reasons that their pro-Brexit in-phoners give for voting to leave.





--
Ian

In message , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 09/09/2019 10:01, Pancho wrote:
I see the benefit of living in a community with shared standards and rules.

But sadly, none of the downsides.

Or indeed the fact that nothing prevents a sovereign UK from sharing
European standards, and indeed rules.

Except of course the EU...

Consider the possibility that the EU got essentially bought by a cartel
of multinationals and banks who proceeded to run it as a criminal
organisation.

Do you seriously consider that a possibility?
I understand that political decisions may be guided by employment, tax
revenue and re-election prospects elsewhere but this seems far fetched
even for you!

How would you stop it 'from inside'?

By gathering support from like minded other members.



--
Tim Lamb

On 09/09/2019 10:16, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/09/2019 10:01, Pancho wrote:
I see the benefit of living in a community with shared standards and
rules.

But sadly, none of the downsides.



I see many downsides, but on balance I strongly believe common rules and
standards are a good thing.

Or indeed the fact that nothing prevents a sovereign UK from sharing
European standards, and indeed rules.


I see that too. Many rules are common across the globe.

Except of course the EU...

Consider the possibility that the EU got essentially bought by a cartel
of multinationals and banks who proceeded to run it as a criminal
organisation.


I do consider this possibility. But why is the EU worse than the UK in
this respect? A fundamental power of multinationals is that they operate
above national laws. In free trade areas they can play individual
nations off against each other. There needs to be international control
over multinationals or tariffs to protect a state from multinationals
operating offshore .

My personal view is the the UK is too small an economic area to make
tariffs work.

How would you stop it 'from inside'?


The question is the same for Brussels or Westminster.

On 2019-09-08, Keema's Nan wrote:
On 8 Sep 2019, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq wrote
(in ):

On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 10:29:31 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:

In , Steve Walker
writes
On 08/09/2019 07:10, Stephen Cole wrote:




Whats the point of all of this, Brian? What do you people genuinely
believe were going to gain from all this upheaval and madness?

Freedom to make our own choices, set our own laws, hold our own
government to account for allowing large numbers of immigrants
overloading already limited resources and infrastructure, reduce the
downward pressure on low-end wages.
We don't seem to have any difficulties setting our own laws. Hasn't
Parliament has just set one (subject to Royal assent on Monday)?

Er, I don't think that it's news that the "lloss of sovereignty" was
fiction. Whether WTO or independent trade our laws have to accommodate
other countries needs also.

The knuckledraggers swallowed everything hook, line and sinker. You
stand no chance of telling the idiots anything, if the truth wasn't
totally obvious at the start, it isn't going to sink in now.

As I have pointed out, it took seconds to work out that PPI was
totally pointless when it was being pushed years back. How many morons
fell for it? An entire industry kicked off helping the brain dead
Brits claim back their cash. Do you really expect any level of
comprehension from the morons?

Strawmen aplenty.

Why not just go back to MySpace, where people revel in this nonsense?

He's pretty obviously a troll, not even as subtle as MM. I'm not going to
waste my time with him.

In article ,
michael adams wrote:
The reason many people say they voted for Brexit was to
control illegal immigration.

Really? Many seemed to want to stop EU workers coming here legally.

--
*All those who believe in psychokinesis, raise my hand *

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

In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 23:57, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
The problem with chlorinated chicken is simply that it is used to "hide"
the poor animal welfare, sanitary controls and transportation of "some"
suppliers, all leading to far higher levels of contamination than in the
EU. I am more concerned about about the welfare (I am a confirmed meat
eater, but see no reason to treat animals worse than is necessary) and
the fact that chlorination not only doesn't kill all the contamination,
but also prevents it being accurately checked. Figures clearly show that
the US rate of food poisoning is many times that in the UK.

That won't go down well with the average right wing Brexiteer here. The
only animals they likely care about the welfare of - including humans -
being dogs and horses.

Why? So long as it is well labelled and customers have the choice.

You think the label will say 'The only way this product is suitable for
human consumption was by the addition of chlorine'?

--
*Would a fly without wings be called a walk?

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

On 09/09/2019 07:59, Brian Reay wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
On 08/09/2019 15:19, Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you want
the
UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.



David is a Remainer, you can't expect him to read things let alone
understand even the most basic concepts.

You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or anyone)
imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing so to theirs.

Where did I suggest that?

However, read YOUR post again. It is significant YOU acknowledged the EU
would be the first to initiate the imposition of tariffs. Clearly even you
acknowledge the EU are the problem here.

All WTO countries have to imposse the tariffs not just the EU.

Thats what WTO is all about, everyone treats you the same unless you
have a trade deal with them.

It would apply to exports into those countries as soon as we no longer
have trade deals, ie the day after brexit.



Hoist by your own petard

Looks like you have been.

"Norman Wells" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 09:31, michael adams wrote:
"Norman Wells" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 08:55, tim... wrote:

we have already published our proposed scale of charges (Norman probably knows where
it is)

and, from examples that have been discussed, for many items the tariffs are much
lower
than EU tariffs

It's he

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/t...exit-published

Those tarriffs are for imports. Which can indeed be set by the UK Govt.

Where are the UK Govt projections of the tarriffs likely to be imposed on UK exports ?

Have they been published anywhere ?

They are the tariffs each country applies to imports of any goods. You'll have to look
them up on a country-by-country basis.

But why should anyone have to look them up ?

The Govt are falling over themselves to publish the "good news" - hurrah
we're going to abolish tarriffs on imports so everything is going to be cheaper

But are strangely silent on the tarriffs the RoW may impose on our exports which
may render them uncompeteive. Don't you worry your pretty little heads about
those - or look them up if you can find out where to look.

The level of complacency you show on this matter is astonishing and
leads one to wonder if you actually live in the real world at all.

You do realise I take it that come Oct 31st entire industries, firms large and small
along with farmers etc are going to have to rethink their entire strategy as to what
they do and how they go about it in respect of 43% of the UK's exports ?
Which in some cases may well be 100% of their exports.


michael adams

....





woory abot those - just look them up








The UK, as with all other countries, does not impose any tariffs on its own exports.

It's how it works.

Or are the Govt secretly hoping that our competitors will somehow take pity on us ?

I think they're secretly hoping you'll start to understand how tariffs work.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
michael adams wrote:
The reason many people say they voted for Brexit was to
control illegal immigration.

Really? Many seemed to want to stop EU workers coming here legally.

You do understand the meaning of the word "many", I take it ?

"Many" means more than "a few", and less than "a majority",
"most", or "all".

Is that any help ?


michael adams

....

On 09/09/2019 09:03, tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Â* Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â*Â* Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you want
the UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

Have you?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

No **** sherlock.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.

And you really think the UK would allow in everything tariff free? While
other countries impose tariffs on our goods?

Not everything no.Â* It's certain we'll impose tariffs on finished goods
(to encourage manufacturing in the UK, from imported tariff free
components)

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we are
not self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no need to
discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that there won't be
minimum standards of production enforced.


really?
it will be interesting to see how long UK farming lasts when the imports
are a lot cheaper due to a lack of tariffs.

how much are we expected to dole out to farmers that can't sell their
crops above the price it costs to produce them and why should we.

On 09/09/2019 11:53, michael adams wrote:
"Norman Wells" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 09:31, michael adams wrote:
"Norman Wells" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 08:55, tim... wrote:

we have already published our proposed scale of charges (Norman probably knows where
it is)

and, from examples that have been discussed, for many items the tariffs are much
lower than EU tariffs

It's he

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/t...exit-published

Those tarriffs are for imports. Which can indeed be set by the UK Govt.

Where are the UK Govt projections of the tarriffs likely to be imposed on UK exports ?

Have they been published anywhere ?

They are the tariffs each country applies to imports of any goods. You'll have to look
them up on a country-by-country basis.

But why should anyone have to look them up ?

To find out what they are of course, and to work out how much extra it
it will cost the consumers of their products in those countries.

It's not that hard.

The Govt are falling over themselves to publish the "good news" - hurrah
we're going to abolish tarriffs on imports so everything is going to be cheaper

No, what it's said is that there won't be tariffs applied to 83% of all
the goods we import.

But are strangely silent on the tarriffs the RoW may impose on our exports which
may render them uncompeteive. Don't you worry your pretty little heads about
those - or look them up if you can find out where to look.

Exporters have to at the moment for exports to anywhere outside the EU.
One assumes they're big enough and ugly enough to do it, and don't need
their hands holding all the time. They're supposed to be businessmen
for goodness sake. It goes with the territory.

The level of complacency you show on this matter is astonishing and
leads one to wonder if you actually live in the real world at all.

It doesn't involve complacency at all.

You do realise I take it that come Oct 31st entire industries, firms large and small
along with farmers etc are going to have to rethink their entire strategy as to what
they do and how they go about it in respect of 43% of the UK's exports ?
Which in some cases may well be 100% of their exports.

No, they just have to look at the tariffs the EU imposes, and work out
how much extra, if anything, it's going to cost the consumers of their
goods.

They've had three years since the people of the UK warned them we were
going to leave the EU. There's no excuse for not being prepared.

On 08/09/2019 22:39, Steve Walker wrote:
On 08/09/2019 10:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 08/09/2019 07:10, Stephen Cole wrote:




Whats the point of all of this, Brian? What do you people genuinely
believe were going to gain from all this upheaval and madness?

Freedom to make our own choices, set our own laws, hold our own
government to account for allowing large numbers of immigrants
overloading already limited resources and infrastructure, reduce the
downward pressure on low-end wages.

We don't seem to have any difficulties setting our own laws. Hasn't
Parliament has just set one (subject to Royal assent on Monday)?

Can we decide on whether we want tracking in our new vehicles? Expensive
safety systems that make only a little difference to safety, but render
vehicles uneconomic to repair after only slight damage?

Probably not as it will be uneconomicto produce many variants and get
them through the approvals with fundementally differen designs. Its one
thing swapping an engine or a few body panels, its something else to
build a new car from the ground up.

To reduce or
raise import tariffs on certain goods?

Probably, but it depends. Others can raise disputes if they think we are
abussing the WTO system.

At what level VAT should be set?

The UK government has set the VAT rates on everything.
The EU just has a rule that says you can't put VAT on something and then
take it off willynilly.


Whether any VAT is due on particular goods?

The UK government negotiated what we were putting VAT on.
It was the UK government that put VAT on electricity and gas not the EU.

To control immigration?

We might be able to, we can now for immigrants but don't and they are
about 60% of the net migration into the UK.

And
the list goes on.

And like all brexiteers you have chosen a set that are not implimented
by the EU but by the UK government, its almost as though brexiteers
don't have a clue.


Yes we can make our own laws - but only if they don't contradict EU laws
or no EU country feels that that law affects their companies more than
others. Look at the ridiculous case of Scotland and now Wales wanting to
introduce a minimum per unit price for alcohol and it being held up as a
number of countries contest it as a restriction of trade.


Yes just look at it.. Scotland do have a minimum price for alcohol so
thats another brexiteer talking cock.

SteveW

On 09/09/2019 10:16, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/09/2019 10:01, Pancho wrote:
I see the benefit of living in a community with shared standards and
rules.

But sadly, none of the downsides.

Or indeed the fact that nothing prevents a sovereign UK from sharing
European standards, and indeed rules.

Except of course the EU...

Consider the possibility that the EU got essentially bought by a cartel
of multinationals and banks who proceeded to run it as a criminal
organisation.

Like boris appears to want to do?


How would you stop it 'from inside'?



It doesn't control parliament as it doesn't have a majority.

On 08/09/2019 23:18, Brian Reay wrote:
8

Your confusion is understandable. Not only is Corbyn €˜confused whether he
is a Remainer, a Leaver, wants an election, ..... so are his senior side
kicks.

The brexiteers are just as confused, they didn't want an election last
Monday but they did on Tuesday.
A day is a long time in politics, especially when you are trying to game
the system like boris is.

On 08/09/2019 22:53, Steve Walker wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Â*Â*Â* Brian Reay wrote:
The Irish problem is entirely fabricated by the EU / Ireland. At no
point has the UK suggested a hard border. It is Ireland which is
building border check points, not the UK.


OK then. EU workers have free movement to Eire. With no border controls,
they can take a bus to Ulster, and onwards to the UK. Unless we have
controls between Ulster and the mainland. Unacceptable to the DUP.

And, as I have said to you many times, they arrive in the UK as
visitors, without the correct paperwork to gain employment, claim
benefits, use the NHS, rent a home, etc.

If they are EU citizens they have those rights so it can't be the EU
that is causing you the problems.
Maybe you confuse illegal immigrants with legal immigrants, migrants and
refuges?


I don't care if the whole world visits the UK, just that only those that
we permit remain here.

That's OK then, no need to stop any EU citizen as they have the right to
do so.


SteveW

On 09/09/2019 11:59, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home"
wrote:
On 09/09/2019 09:03, tim... wrote:

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we
are not self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no
need to discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that there
won't be minimum standards of production enforced.

really?

it will be interesting to see how long UK farming lasts when the
imports are a lot cheaper due to a lack of tariffs.

how much are we expected to dole out to farmers that can't sell their
crops above the price it costs to produce them and why should we.

Farmers are already subsidised and paid to do other things than grow
food. If you want to close all that down, feel free, but expect all
farmland to revert to scrub or forest in short order.

'Countryside and wildlife' surely, replete with buzzing bees, skylarks,
butterflies, dragonflies, great oaks, flower meadows, fields full of
poppies, dormice, bunnies, Bambis, nuclear families, happy children
skipping, Teletubbies and unicorns.

Just like when I were a lad.

"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"Norman Wells" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 09:31, michael adams wrote:
"Norman Wells" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 08:55, tim... wrote:

we have already published our proposed scale of charges (Norman
probably knows where
it is)

and, from examples that have been discussed, for many items the
tariffs are much lower
than EU tariffs

It's he

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/t...exit-published

Those tarriffs are for imports. Which can indeed be set by the UK Govt.

Where are the UK Govt projections of the tarriffs likely to be imposed
on UK exports ?

Have they been published anywhere ?

They are the tariffs each country applies to imports of any goods. You'll
have to look them up on a country-by-country basis.

But why should anyone have to look them up ?

The Govt are falling over themselves to publish the "good news" - hurrah
we're going to abolish tarriffs on imports so everything is going to be
cheaper

But are strangely silent on the tarriffs the RoW may impose on our exports
which
may render them uncompeteive.

because for the most part, they don't render oue exports uncompetitive

Tariffs are almost all of an order of magnitude lower than the amount that
our currency has depreciated

And before anyone says, Lamb exports to the EU being one of those exceptions

tim

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 09:03, tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Fredxx wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause a
problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you
want
the UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

Have you?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

No **** sherlock.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after a
no deal Brexit.

And you really think the UK would allow in everything tariff free? While
other countries impose tariffs on our goods?

Not everything no. It's certain we'll impose tariffs on finished goods
(to encourage manufacturing in the UK, from imported tariff free
components)

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we are
not self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no need to
discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that there won't be
minimum standards of production enforced.


really?
it will be interesting to see how long UK farming lasts when the imports
are a lot cheaper due to a lack of tariffs.

apparently 90% of our imported food comes from the EU already

so there will be no change there

and even if you do think that tariff free imports from some dirt poor
African county with zero production costs are somehow going to decimate our
farmers

Then, as I have already show, the tariffs on imports from these countries
are of the order of 3-5%. Do you really think that taking it dowe to zero
makes any difference?

how much are we expected to dole out to farmers that can't sell their
crops above the price it costs to produce them

we already do that.

Except that it's the EU giving them our money

and why should we.


because having some semblance of food security is strategically important

tim

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 08/09/2019 22:39, Steve Walker wrote:
On 08/09/2019 10:29, Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , Steve Walker
writes
On 08/09/2019 07:10, Stephen Cole wrote:




Whats the point of all of this, Brian? What do you people genuinely
believe were going to gain from all this upheaval and madness?

Freedom to make our own choices, set our own laws, hold our own
government to account for allowing large numbers of immigrants
overloading already limited resources and infrastructure, reduce the
downward pressure on low-end wages.

We don't seem to have any difficulties setting our own laws. Hasn't
Parliament has just set one (subject to Royal assent on Monday)?

Can we decide on whether we want tracking in our new vehicles? Expensive
safety systems that make only a little difference to safety, but render
vehicles uneconomic to repair after only slight damage?

Probably not as it will be uneconomicto produce many variants and get them
through the approvals with fundementally differen designs. Its one thing
swapping an engine or a few body panels, its something else to build a new
car from the ground up.

but it does mean that we can say "a not working thingamajig is no longer an
MOT failure"

I just had to scrap a car because some functionally unnecessary, but
mandatory, additional thingy broke and cost more to replace than the car was
worth.

To reduce or raise import tariffs on certain goods?

Probably, but it depends. Others can raise disputes if they think we are
abussing the WTO system.

That would be charging differential tariffs (which are legal, but have to be
justified)

simply setting a high tariff for all, is not an abuse of the system


At what level VAT should be set?

The UK government has set the VAT rates on everything.
The EU just has a rule that says you can't put VAT on something and then
take it off willynilly.


Whether any VAT is due on particular goods?

The UK government negotiated what we were putting VAT on.

No we didn't

the rules were already in place when we joined.

It was the UK government that put VAT on electricity and gas not the EU.

but the rules says that once we put it on (a new category) we cannot take it
off again

To control immigration?

We might be able to, we can now for immigrants but don't and they are
about 60% of the net migration into the UK.

Non-EU immigration all fits into the category of:

Highly skilled workers (with a job offer) or joining family members to be
supported by the family already here

Almost none of the ROW immigration comes here to take up minimum wage work
and scrounge on the welfare state.

That's the problem with EU immigration - that it's possible for them to do
that, not that they all do.

And the list goes on.

And like all brexiteers you have chosen a set that are not implimented by
the EU but by the UK government, its almost as though brexiteers don't
have a clue.

and your misunderstanding of ROW immigration show that you don't have a clue
either

On 09/09/2019 10:52, Pancho wrote:
On 09/09/2019 10:16, The Natural Philosopher wrote:


Consider the possibility that the EU got essentially bought by a
cartel of multinationals and banks who proceeded to run it as a
criminal organisation.


I do consider this possibility. But why is the EU worse than the UK in
this respect? A fundamental power of multinationals is that they operate
above national laws. In free trade areas they can play individual
nations off against each other. There needs to be international control
over multinationals or tariffs to protect a state from multinationals
operating offshore .

My personal view is the the UK is too small an economic area to make
tariffs work.

How would you stop it 'from inside'?


The question is the same for Brussels or Westminster.


But the answer is different.

That is why we are leaving



--
Canada is all right really, though not for the whole weekend.

"Saki"

On 09/09/2019 11:59, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 09/09/2019 09:03, tim... wrote:

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we
are not self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no
need to discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that there
won't be minimum standards of production enforced.

really?

it will be interesting to see how long UK farming lasts when the
imports are a lot cheaper due to a lack of tariffs.

how much are we expected to dole out to farmers that can't sell their
crops above the price it costs to produce them and why should we.

Farmers are already subsidised and paid to do other things than grow
food. If you want to close all that down, feel free, but expect all
farmland to revert to scrub or forest in short order.

The urban fgreens who have never planted a potato in their lives would
consider that a victory


--
€œPeople believe certain stories because everyone important tells them,
and people tell those stories because everyone important believes them.
Indeed, when a conventional wisdom is at its fullest strength, ones
agreement with that conventional wisdom becomes almost a litmus test of
ones suitability to be taken seriously.€�

Paul Krugman

"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
michael adams wrote:
The reason many people say they voted for Brexit was to
control illegal immigration.

Really? Many seemed to want to stop EU workers coming here legally.

You do understand the meaning of the word "many", I take it ?

"Many" means more than "a few", and less than "a majority",
"most", or "all".

in relative terms,

as the total sample set is 17 million, even a tiny percentage of that number
would be many people in absolute terms

It's a pointless use of the word (whichever way you are trying to use it)

tim

In article , tim...
wrote:


"dennis@home" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2019 09:03, tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article , Fredxx
wrote:
On 08/09/2019 12:44, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , Brian Reay
wrote:
Plus, tariffs are not mandatory. If the EU impose them and cause
a problem that is their problem.

Can I get this clear? In your Utopian UK, after crashing out, you
want the UK to have no tariffs at all on imports?

Have you talked to your idol Trump about this?

Have you actually read Brian's post?

Have you?

It is the choice of the importing nation to set tariffs, or agree an
alternative, ie a deal.

No **** sherlock.

You misunderstand it is not the EU that sets UK import tariffs after
a no deal Brexit.

And you really think the UK would allow in everything tariff free?
While other countries impose tariffs on our goods?

Not everything no. It's certain we'll impose tariffs on finished
goods (to encourage manufacturing in the UK, from imported tariff
free components)

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we
are not self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no
need to discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that there
won't be minimum standards of production enforced.


really? it will be interesting to see how long UK farming lasts when
the imports are a lot cheaper due to a lack of tariffs.

apparently 90% of our imported food comes from the EU already

so there will be no change there

and even if you do think that tariff free imports from some dirt poor
African county with zero production costs are somehow going to decimate
our farmers

our orange growers will feel the impact

Then, as I have already show, the tariffs on imports from these countries
are of the order of 3-5%. Do you really think that taking it dowe to
zero makes any difference?

how much are we expected to dole out to farmers that can't sell their
crops above the price it costs to produce them

we already do that.

Except that it's the EU giving them our money

and why should we.


because having some semblance of food security is strategically important

tim


--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

In article , Tim Streater
wrote:
In article , Norman Wells
wrote:

On 09/09/2019 11:53, michael adams wrote:

The Govt are falling over themselves to publish the "good news" -
hurrah we're going to abolish tarriffs on imports so everything is
going to be cheaper

No, what it's said is that there won't be tariffs applied to 83% of all
the goods we import.

But are strangely silent on the tarriffs the RoW may impose on our
exports which may render them uncompeteive. Don't you worry your
pretty little heads about those - or look them up if you can find out
where to look.

Exporters have to at the moment for exports to anywhere outside the EU.
One assumes they're big enough and ugly enough to do it, and don't need
their hands holding all the time. They're supposed to be businessmen
for goodness sake. It goes with the territory.

Adams is a dimwit, eh? Only a thickie like him would be unable to
comprehend that such tariffs are already being imposed on goods sold to
RoW.

Tariffs are imposed by importing countries.

What's so hard about that, eh? Answer, it isn't. So one must assume he
has another agenda. Gosh, I wonder what that could be.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England
"I'd rather die of exhaustion than die of boredom" Thomas Carlyle

In article ,
Brian Reay wrote:
You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or
anyone) imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing so
to theirs.

Where did I suggest that?

However, read YOUR post again. It is significant YOU acknowledged the EU
would be the first to initiate the imposition of tariffs. Clearly even
you acknowledge the EU are the problem here.

Thanks for confirming you see it as some form of game. Where goals being
scored are important. That it makes a whit of difference who applies
tariffs first. As they are inevitable.

Hoist by your own petard.

Sadly, the vast majority of ordinary UK citizens will be shafted by a no
deal Brexit. But I'd guess you don't care about that.

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

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

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Brian Reay
wrote:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Steve Walker wrote:
The problem with chlorinated chicken is simply that it is used to "hide"
the poor animal welfare, sanitary controls and transportation of "some"
suppliers, all leading to far higher levels of contamination than in the
EU. I am more concerned about about the welfare (I am a confirmed meat
eater, but see no reason to treat animals worse than is necessary) and
the fact that chlorination not only doesn't kill all the contamination,
but also prevents it being accurately checked. Figures clearly show that
the US rate of food poisoning is many times that in the UK.

That won't go down well with the average right wing Brexiteer here. The
only animals they likely care about the welfare of - including humans -
being dogs and horses.

Another sweeping and incorrect generalisation.

It's all you ever get from Our Dave - haven't you noticed?

No point in trying to argue specifics with the likes of you. You have been
well trained by Trump.

--
*IF ONE SYNCHRONIZED SWIMMER DROWNS, DO THE REST DROWN TOO?

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

In article ,
tim... wrote:
You are utterly mad if you think the UK would accept the EU (or anyone)
imposing tariffs on its exports while refraining from doing so to theirs.

but we are

we have already published our proposed scale of charges (Norman probably
knows where it is)

So you've changed the name from tarrif to charges?

and, from examples that have been discussed, for many items the tariffs
are much lower than EU tariffs

What are you on about? There are no tarrifs between the EU and UK at the
moment. And do you honestly think future tariffs can be set in stone
before we've even left the EU?

--
*What do you call a dinosaur with an extensive vocabulary? A thesaurus.*

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

In article ,
tim... wrote:
And you really think the UK would allow in everything tariff free? While
other countries impose tariffs on our goods?

Not everything no. It's certain we'll impose tariffs on finished goods (to
encourage manufacturing in the UK, from imported tariff free components)

But there seems to be a move for zero tariffs on agriculture, as we are
not self sufficient in food and (except in a few cases) have no need to
discourage importation of such - that doesn't mean that there won't be
minimum standards of production enforced.

Think you forget tariffs are often used as a political weapon. Since so
many agricultural products are available from more than one country.

--
*Caution: I drive like you do.

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

In article ,
charles wrote:
In article , Archibald Tarquin
Blenkinsopp Esq wrote:
On Sun, 8 Sep 2019 21:56:34 +0100, "michael adams" mjadams25@ukonline
wrote:


"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp Esq" wrote in
message ...

* Immigration authorities may also require you to have valid
official photo-identification which shows your nationality.*
As I pointed out it is totally academic as the same conditions would
apply to anyone entering a port or Airside.

The other minor problem you might have with your argument is that you
can travel to Ireland on a driving licence if going by air. A passport
or proof of nationality is not required.

It's not a legal requirement, but then airline won't take you - their
rules

I doubt the average EU fruit picker would choose to fly from Ireland to
the UK.

--
*Taxation WITH representation ain't much fun, either.

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

In article ,
tim... wrote:


"michael adams" wrote in message
...

"tim..." wrote in message
...

but they can't live or work here once they get here, because
employers/landlords are supposed to check their eligibility

So that seems to be one of the *actual* reasons for people
voting for Brexit, blown to smithereens in one sentence.

which actual reason would that be?

It's a fair guess that the leave side won the referendum by the large
numbers of those who wanted to stop the free movement of EU workers voting
leave. Not by those looking to regain sovereignty or other esoteric
reasons to be anti EU.

Those in the poorer areas of the UK believed EU immigrant workers were
taking their jobs and houses and increasing pressure on local services,
like the NHS.

Much easier to blame people you could actually see than the government.

--
*Upon the advice of my attorney, my shirt bears no message at this time

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

On 09/09/2019 13:03, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

How would you stop it 'from inside'?


The question is the same for Brussels or Westminster.


But the answer is different.


In what way is it different?

If anything the EU is more robust with regard to multinationals and more
resistant to their influence. Look at recent rules with respect to Google.

So why not give a specific? Rather than abstract comments, because I
don't have a clue what you are talking about.

That is why we are leaving


We are leaving? When did that happen?

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/09/2019 10:01, Pancho wrote:
I see the benefit of living in a community with shared standards and
rules.

But sadly, none of the downsides.

Or indeed the fact that nothing prevents a sovereign UK from sharing
European standards, and indeed rules.

Indeed. And will still be forced to, once out of the EU. For things we
wish to export there. Same as with other countries. Rather than isolate,
it would make more sense to have international standards where possible.
Not your way of just wanting your own rules.

Except of course the EU...

Eh?

Consider the possibility that the EU got essentially bought by a cartel
of multinationals and banks who proceeded to run it as a criminal
organisation.

How would you stop it 'from inside'?

Have you been smoking something? Or just hitting the booze rather earlier
than usual?

--
*Confession is good for the soul, but bad for your career.

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