Brexit, for once some facts.

[Kudoscycles]

If Trump does put import tariffs of 45% on everything from China,that will hit the American poor very hard,because everything that Wal Mart sells comes from Asia,I can see WalMart stuffing their prices up. IT IS THE IMPORTING COUNTRY THAT PAYS THE TARIFF.
If Theresa May does a free trade deal with China and the USA,I can see wonderful opportunities of backdooring Chinese product into the US,,,Trump will put country of origin rules on product but that is easily got round.
KudosDave

 

[Kudoscycles]

People are discussing what we can sell the chinese post a free trade deal,we could make them into drug addicts.....then our container ships could drop into Afghanistan pick up some cocaine and heroin,then sail onto Guangzhou (the old Canton)to swop for i-pads and i-phones.
If they wont play ball we could send one of our frigates into the Pearl River,kill a few hundred Chinese and shell Guangzhou.
Been done before but it would be the arrogant English way,not making ourselves good neighbours but hey-ho we dont seem to care any longer if anyone likes us.
Hope the frigate doesnt break down on the way,hehe
If that doesnt work we could always send in Fox and bore them to death or Boris,they would die laughing.
KudosDave

 

[Woosh]

If Trump does put import tariffs of 45% on everything from China,that will hit the American poor very hard

I think it's empty threat. He can't do that because both are members of the WTO.

 

[flecc]

We know from reports that Trump seems weirdly fond of Putin, an odd situation for an American President.

I think that is rational, even to be expected. Vladimir Putin is decisive, knows what he wants and gets it, not taking no for an answer. Faced with Chechen rebellion, he crushed them. Faced with the threat to his southern fleet home port, he acquired the Crimea to safeguard it. Then to help his ally Syria, he showed the west how to deal with ISIS, no messing or pussyfooting.

All this is right up Trump's street, he is bound to admire such decisive action.
.

 

[Woosh]

I think Trump is all mouth and no trousers, he's not a match for Putin.
What has he done so far?

 

[flecc]

I think Trump is all mouth and no trousers, he's not a match for Putin.
What has he done so far?

But that's typical of fans, all too often wannabees admiring what they'd like to be.
.

 

[Woosh]

he sure is a fan, but will he learn something from the master though?
he says a lot of things to please his people but I still can't see how congress is going to let him spend 1 trillion on infrastructure, money that they will have to borrow from the Chinese and Germans.

Back to brexit, there is a theory that as soon as the EU presents to Mrs May with the divorce bill, she would claim it 'outrageous' and use it as a pretext to walk out of the negotiation and call a new election in May.

 

[oldtom]

There's an excellent piece today on 'Brexit' from AAV, a rather good internet blogger on political matters. It's worth a read:

http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/03/its-time-to-start-preparing-for-tory.html

Tom

 

[oldgroaner]

I think the issue is more 'do/can we stay in the EU for 10-20 more years?'.
Ever since Maastricht, the EU has a very clear path to the future that half the UK does not want.

Even though the same half to a great degree didn't even know what the EU had done for them, nor how it was organised, and saw the referendum vote as being against the Tory government on the basis "If they want it we don't?"

 

[flecc]

Back to brexit, there is a theory that as soon as the EU presents to Mrs May with the divorce bill, she would claim it 'outrageous' and use it as a pretext to walk out of the negotiation and call a new election in May.

That would certainly get her the larger majority she needs to railroad through her Brexit intentions. At present the Commons position is bit wobbly, they may side with the Lords.
.

 

[Woosh]

Even though the same half to a great degree didn't even know what the EU had done for them, nor how it was organised, and saw the referendum vote as being against the Tory government on the basis "If they want it we don't?"

I think for many, the reason is a lot simpler than that.
They don't want the UK to be absorbed into a European superstate.
That's the only destination for the EU and not in a very distant future, 20 years at the most.

 

[oldgroaner]

I think for many, the reason is a lot simpler than that.
They don't want the UK to be absorbed into a European superstate.
That's the only destination for the EU and not in a very distant future, 20 years at the most.

Two questions

1. What makes you believe that
2. We had already opted out of any such arrangement, and the EU had accepted that, so why do you see this as a threat?

Sorry but that is a non starter and I doubt if the average voter cared less about it. why should they care one way or another? it's another "Fake Truth"
If anything they would only be against it if the Government was "For it" and of course that was neither the situation, or really likely to affect us, as we would have been outside it anyway.
And now we can't prevent it happening, nor the EU raising an army that could be used against us.
A brilliant strategy, one wonders how Putin managed to pull it off!
Surely by now he thinks we must have gone raving mad!
The very thing we have always feared, now brought about by our own incredibly naive act of leaving the EU.
Is there any other way we can inflict self harm to ourselves left to explore?
We may as well get rid of our Nuclear Deterrent, as why would Putin attack us when we are busily destroying ourselves, and all he has to do is watch and applaud?

 

[Woosh]

Two questions

1. What makes you believe that
2. We had already opted out of any such arrangement, and the EU had accepted that, so why do you see this as a threat?

It's certainly not fake truth.
'forever closer union' is a phrase that has no legal power in itself but because it is written into the original treaty in 1957 and since then, repeated in every subsequent treaty, there is no real escape from it.
I know Cameron opted out of it but as the EU will end up as a superstate with bits on the side. We will be left out among the bits.
I lived in France in the 60s and 70s, a lot of French did not like it even then, because they were fearful of a German domination. Le Pen will exploit that fear for her campaign.
Personally, I like what the EU has achieved but I prefer the old Europe.

 

[Danidl]

It's certainly not fake truth.
'forever closer union' is a phrase that has no legal power in itself but because it is written into the original treaty in 1957 and since then, repeated in every subsequent treaty, there is no real escape from it.
I know Cameron opted out of it but as the EU will end up as a superstate with bits on the side. We will be left out among the bits.
I lived in France in the 60s and 70s, a lot of French did not like it even then, because they were fearful of a German domination. Le Pen will exploit that fear for her campaign.
Personally, I like what the EU has achieved but I prefer the old Europe.

I am inclined to agree with Woosh on this one. There is a group driving closer integration and there is a rump who are not convinced of it value. This would have been one of the many reasons why I would have preferred the UK to remain. The accession of the ex Soviet states has slowed down the process, as their economic development lags that of the early adopters. Without the ballast of the UK the process may accerate.

 

[oldgroaner]

It's certainly not fake truth.
'forever closer union' is a phrase that has no legal power in itself but because it is written into the original treaty in 1957 and since then, repeated in every subsequent treaty, there is no real escape from it.
I know Cameron opted out of it but as the EU will end up as a superstate with bits on the side. We will be left out among the bits.
I lived in France in the 60s and 70s, a lot of French did not like it even then, because they were fearful of a German domination. Le Pen will exploit that fear for her campaign.
Personally, I like what the EU has achieved but I prefer the old Europe.

I have already pointed out that you are not going to get your "old"Europe back are you? and what happens over there is now completely out of our control for good or bad, how can that be an advantage to us?
It simply isn't, is it?
When the EU superstate happens where will we stand?
In it's not inconsiderable shadow unable to have any influence over it, and that is a nightmare situation as we have faced in the past.
If we are not part of Europe, by the very fact of Geography we will be at it's mercy by our own choice.
And the USA won't help us will they? they bled us white the last time, and the one before that.

 

[oldgroaner]

I am inclined to agree with Woosh on this one. There is a group driving closer integration and there is a rump who are not convinced of it value. This would have been one of the many reasons why I would have preferred the UK to remain. The accession of the ex Soviet states has slowed down the process, as their economic development lags that of the early adopters. Without the ballast of the UK the process may accerate.

That is my fear too, and the fact that we cannot assume relationships with this superstate will necessarily be to our advantage.
I am all in favour of a United States of Europe, but not being on the Outside of it where it may turn out not to be to our liking.
By the way the "Fake News" I was referring to was that the voters were necessarily against the formation of a USA of Europe, as that is an assumption, they have never had the subject broached to them for discussion.

 

[Woosh]

the fact that we cannot assume relationships with this superstate will necessarily be to our advantage.

More reasons to start looking elsewhere.

 

[Woosh]

I have already pointed out that you are not going to get your "old"Europe back are you?

I merely want too attract your attention to what was good then, what's worth protecting from being absorbed, uniformized into a superstate, or left out or becoming unimportant or all of it.

 

[oldtom]

I merely want too attract your attention to what was good then, what's worth protecting from being absorbed, uniformized into a superstate, or left out or becoming unimportant or all of it.

Is there an English version of this because I don't understand it at all.

Tom

 

[flecc]

uniformized into a superstate

As I've pointed out before, there is no such thing, areas always maintain their characters and buck uniformity. After 250 years of union, are the Scots just like the English, and after 2000 years together in England, are the people of Yorkshire, Devon and Norfolk identical?

The only uniformities that are brought about are the sensible ones that help us all, like laws that are consistent as we cross boundaries, like our right to be treated with respect, care and decency anywhere in the union.

I'm saddened that we will no longer be a beneficiary of those advantages and potentially again exposed to the abuses of our national government as so often in the past.
.