Brexit, for once some facts.

[tommie]

One for the Remoaners to ponder lol!!

Drunkers choice of footware today...brown and black ..

yep this is whats in charge of the EU,

Drunks and Gangsters!!

https://twitter.com/i/status/1063179544788697089

 

[oldgroaner]

One for the Remoaners to ponder lol!!

Drunkers choice of footware today...brown and black ..

yep this is whats in charge of the EU,

Drunks and Gangsters!!

https://twitter.com/i/status/1063179544788697089

tommie,what is the point of this post? why does a pair of shoes indicate someone is a drunk and a gangster?
Or is this the way they think in your area?
Explain what we should ponder
Choice of three

1. Brown and Black shoes what do they mean?
2. Why are leave voters not asked to ponder too?
   
3. Why was this post actually posted?

 

[flecc]

Drunks and Gangsters!!

That's rich, coming from Ireland.

Jean Claude Junker's presidency has very limited functions, but one of those has to been get the UK to implement EU policies. Little wonder if that has driven him to drink. He has no meaningful executive powers so his footwear doesn't concern me and his term of office ends in a few months time.

He has two superiors, the President of the EU Parliament, currently Antonio Tajani, and the President of the EU Commission, currently Donald Tusk.
.

 

[Danidl]

Ok. Again. You are brainwashed. You should find a traditional religion. You’d get more friends. Maybe even folks in real life would talk to you so you wouldn’t have to spam here so frequently.

Merkel was almost crying for us to reverse the decision last weekend but the facts are if we do reverse the will of the people the EU needs to modernise. Some medium gestures would definitely help. But let’s be honest this arrogant, unelected institution hasn’t shown much flexibility in the past. And it is stuck in the past.

In regard to extra money you really need to be aware of global politics. Italy is about to tank Greece style. Germany is not going to bail them out. An emergency budget will ensure the 27 will have to find the money.

Talking about budgets. In 2020 when the next EU budget is the talk is that the EU wants an army. As the union grows ever closer and becomes a United States of Europe you will see an ever growing demand for centralised money. To unelected people of course. (But you know they are really good people and just want the best for you right)

You’re so naive it’s enduring. But only to a point. Your naivety is dangerous. You are so enthralled to the EU ‘project’ you are blind to it’s very real flaws.

A European Union can be a great thing. A United States of Europe with Germany pulling the strings will lead to disaster.

Right fingers, .. let's to it..
1.Merkel was wishing the UK would back out of the debacle they have got THEMSELVES into. It is a wish shared by some 380 million in Europe. .excluding some 17 millions in one of its countries.
2. The EU is in need of reform, not necessary modernisation. Any organisation which has grown as much as it has, particularly with the inclusion of a large state like Poland, and Hungry, needs to.
3. Your comments about "unelected " , are so off the mark that they would be funny if not so pathetic..I have answered that lie so many times here,that I am tired..if you want truth go back over my previous postings,if you want your fantasy, then continue...
4. Global finances are beyond my area of expertise, and I suspect yours also. ,But at least I recognize that.
5. If the UK did and does not want a European Army, the place to fight it is inside the tent, where it could have influence,and perhaps be in a position to bid for weapons systems. It strikes me as an own goal, to walk off the pitch and leaving the opposition with both the ball and the referee and half the match to play. ..(mixing metaphors) .

 

[oldgroaner]

This is what leave voters got for their victory from The Times

A Brexiteer hedge fund manager proclaimed a good day at the office last night as market fears that Britain could crash out of the EU without an agreement sent the pound tumbling.

Crispin Odey, the investment tycoon, said that mounting concern over the future of Theresa May’s fragile premiership had boosted his funds as shares in British banks, retailers and housebuilders fell sharply.

“I have had a good day,” he told The Times. “Bad days tend to be good days for us.” Mr Odey has been betting against the pound and stocks exposed to the British economy.

Is this what you voted leave for, to fatten these creatures bank balances off shore?

 

[tommie]

That's rich, coming from Ireland.

And that`s a shameful Racist comment.
I and other Irish members on this forum will expect an apology for that.


Jean Claude Junker's presidency has very limited functions,

You got that bit right, ............... because he`s a drunk.

.

 

[Fingers]

No no no. He has a bad back!

Everyone who's had a bad back stumbles about in odd shoes stinking of red wine and brandy.

I wonder if anyone in here voted for him? Apparently the EU is completely democratic.....

Surely someone must have?

 

[Fingers]

I can only think you haven't been paying attention, there is no hope, nor ever was, of brinkmanship achieving anything better.

The departure phase of the negotiations is over. The other 27 EU member countries gave the Commission the authority to negotiate it and they are honouring that.

From the outset in 2016 it was made clear by the Commission that no deal could be better than membership, so we knew an unsatisfactory outcome was inevitable, even before the referendum vote.

Ergo, we can stay in and enjoy the membership benefits, or leave and suffer any consequences.
.

Every deal the EU has ever done has been by brinkmanship and leaving it till the very, very last moment. It's how this chaotic organisation runs.

Why would this be any different? End of a very long day countries will realise they are dealing with us directly. The EU has offered and May has weakly accepted an impossible deal. It's literally worse than you could make up.

We have nothing to lose now. It's a shame but here we are.

WTO rules. Although I doubt it will come to that. Too much at stake. We have a massive trade surplus with them in their favour. Why would they risk their own economies nose diving so Juncker and his ilk can prove a point?

Doesn't make sense.

 

[flecc]

And that`s a shameful Racist comment.
I and other Irish members on this forum will expect an apology for that.

You posted this incorrectly so I had to sort it for you to be able to quote.

You must be joking about an apology, Ireland has no drunks or gangsters?!!!

You might start by apologising for your unfounded accusations of there being gangsters running the EU.
.

 

[Fingers]

You posted this incorrectly so I had to sort it for you to be able to quote.

You must be joking about an apology, Ireland has no drunks or gangsters?!!!

You might start by apologising for your unfounded accusations of there being gangsters running the EU.
.

Depends on what your definition of gangster is.

When Juncker was in charge of Luxembourg he did some very very corrupt practices.

 

[flecc]

Every deal the EU has ever done has been by brinkmanship and leaving it till the very, very last moment.

Why would this be any different?

The difference is that there were clear rules to follow and the specification that a leave deal could not be better than being in. This lack of latitude rendered negotiation somewhat pointless.

End of a very long day countries will realise they are dealing with us directly.

Once again, no they are not. They passed that to the EU Commission and it was specified that they could not subsequently deal direct. That is why David Cameron's trip to attempt to negotiate with individual leaders was rebuffed, some of them pointing out this fact and refusing to discuss a deal.

WTO rules. Although I doubt it will come to that. Too much at stake. We have a massive trade surplus with them in their favour. Why would they risk their own economies nose diving

There isn't the slightest risk of their economies nose diving, you really are confused about this. The loss is the same for both sides, but our one country bears our half, theirs is shared by 27 countries, making it easy to bear.

The largest individual loss is Germany's if the EU countries lost all access to the UK, that would cost their economy 7%. They have already said late in 2016 that they could absorb that, and the proof came in the 2008 recession which also cost them 7%. They rode through that without any difficult and continued to prosper.

Conversely what we'd suffer from the loss of the whole EU market would be crippling since it's the bulk of our services and goods export sales.

These facts alone meant negotiation would be fruitless, they held all the cards.
.

 

[Danidl]

Every deal the EU has ever done has been by brinkmanship and leaving it till the very, very last moment. It's how this chaotic organisation runs.

Why would this be any different? End of a very long day countries will realise they are dealing with us directly. The EU has offered and May has weakly accepted an impossible deal. It's literally worse than you could make up.

We have nothing to lose now. It's a shame but here we are.

WTO rules. Although I doubt it will come to that. Too much at stake. We have a massive trade surplus with them in their favour. Why would they risk their own economies nose diving so Juncker and his ilk can prove a point?

Doesn't make sense.

This is going to be a compendium answer ...

If and it is very much if, the Commons passes this agreement, it will certainly be a second or maybe third best option for the UK and EU. But it could and still might be a lot, lot worse.
As before I hold the opinion that staying in fully would be the best option both for the UK and EU. There are probably a few items which might have been more palatable to the UK.
The response of the financial markets with every convulsion in the UK Parliament,says a lot for how sober people see it.
Tommie, I do agree that the comment about us being a drunken nation, should be challenged... . I was listening to BBC Ulster this morning while in Belfast, and around 10 :15 this morning there was a gentleman on who might have made more sense had he been drunk!. If this is what you are subjected to routinely, no wonder you are addled. He was claiming that this proposal would give Dublin control of the North, and this is not why he had been fighting the Shinners for twenty years. Even the interviewer was finding that hard to take, but his remonstrations were falling on deaf ears.
More sober minds in the North including the Farmers Union and the Business sector have been cautiously welcoming.
Fingers, can you not see that this is the brinkmanship deal. ?. The clock has already wound down ,the clock has gone red, we are in injury time. Whether the UK negotiating team used their 2 years wisely is no longer relevent. The time to have had this proposal on the table for discussion and serious modification was a year ago. .. Or more sensibly would have been to have had these as discussions, PRIOR to handing in the Article 50 letter.

 

[oldtom]

Is this what you voted for?

Yes, of course it is OG; they all knew exactly what they were voting for!

If only a few of them would ask themselves one simple question and that question is this: 'Why is it that the people leading the crusade to be free of the EU are, without exception, millionaires, multi-millionaires and billionaires?'

The plebs who voted to leave after the rabble-rousers of the extreme right had stirred their jingoistic spirit could even be excused for being the thick, imbecilic racists that they are, egged on as they were by the scum of the British establishment.

So, they knew OG; they knew that the multi-millionaires in question had suddenly developed a humanitarian desire for the first time in the annals of history to serve the common people by creating the means by which the ordinary folk would be better off….yeah, they knew!

The rhetoric of those purveying this 'bright future' was firmly based in these words by a chap from the west midlands known as Bill:

Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;
Or close the wall up with our English dead.
In peace there's nothing so becomes a man
As modest stillness and humility:
But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger;
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favour'd rage;
Then lend the eye a terrible aspect;
Let pry through the portage of the head
Like the brass cannon; let the brow o'erwhelm it
As fearfully as doth a galled rock
O'erhang and jutty his confounded base,
Swill'd with the wild and wasteful ocean.
Now set the teeth and stretch the nostril wide,
Hold hard the breath and bend up every spirit
To his full height. On, on, you noblest English.
Whose blood is fet from fathers of war-proof!
Fathers that, like so many Alexanders,
Have in these parts from morn till even fought
And sheathed their swords for lack of argument:
Dishonour not your mothers; now attest
That those whom you call'd fathers did beget you.
Be copy now to men of grosser blood,
And teach them how to war. And you, good yeoman,
Whose limbs were made in England, show us here
The mettle of your pasture; let us swear
That you are worth your breeding; which I doubt not;
For there is none of you so mean and base,
That hath not noble lustre in your eyes.
I see you stand like greyhounds in the slips,
Straining upon the start. The game's afoot:
Follow your spirit, and upon this charge
Cry 'God for Harry, England, and Saint George!'

Tom

 

[Fingers]

The difference is that there were clear rules to follow and the specification that a leave deal could not be better than being in. This lack of latitude rendered negotiation somewhat pointless.



Once again, no they are not. They passed that to the EU Commission and it was specified that they could not subsequently deal direct. That is why David Cameron's trip to attempt to negotiate with individual leaders was rebuffed, some of them pointing out this fact and refusing to discuss a deal.



There isn't the slightest risk of their economies nose diving, you really are confused about this. The loss is the same for both sides, but our one country bears our half, theirs is shared by 27 countries, making it easy to bear.

The largest individual loss is Germany's if the EU countries lost all access to the UK, that would cost their economy 7%. They have already said late in 2016 that they could absorb that, and the proof came in the 2008 recession which also cost them 7%. They rode through that without any difficult and continued to prosper.

Conversely what we'd suffer from the loss of the whole EU market would be crippling since it's the bulk of our services and goods export sales.
.

Firstly there was no framework of leaving. It's one of the biggest stumbling blocks of the negotiations that an exit clause was in the original contract. Well actually is the biggest. Henceforth why it's such a dog's breakfast.

Ireland is the other main reason we have such an impasse. They want to give us a bloody nose for historic reasons. Shame as they really will suffer much worse than us if we can't get a deal.

 

[oldtom]

Or more sensibly would have been to have had these as discussions, PRIOR to handing in the Article 50 letter.

Oh, stop talking all that biddy sense Dan; it's wasted on the 'Brexit'-voting plebs of the UK!

Tom

 

[Fingers]

This is going to be a compendium answer ...

If and it is very much if, the Commons passes this agreement, it will certainly be a second or maybe third best option for the UK and EU. But it could and still might be a lot, lot worse.
As before I hold the opinion that staying in fully would be the best option both for the UK and EU. There are probably a few items which might have been more palatable to the UK.
The response of the financial markets with every convulsion in the UK Parliament,says a lot for how sober people see it.
Tommie, I do agree that the comment about us being a drunken nation, should be challenged... . I was listening to BBC Ulster this morning while in Belfast, and around 10 :15 this morning there was a gentleman on who might have made more sense had he been drunk!. If this is what you are subjected to routinely, no wonder you are addled. He was claiming that this proposal would give Dublin control of the North, and this is not why he had been fighting the Shinners for twenty years. Even the interviewer was finding that hard to take, but his remonstrations were falling on deaf ears.
More sober minds in the North including the Farmers Union and the Business sector have been cautiously welcoming.
Fingers, can you not see that this is the brinkmanship deal. ?. The clock has already wound down ,the clock has gone red, we are in injury time. Whether the UK negotiating team used their 2 years wisely is no longer relevent. The time to have had this proposal on the table for discussion and serious modification was a year ago. .. Or more sensibly would have been to have had these as discussions, PRIOR to handing in the Article 50 letter.

Not denying our negotiators have ballsed this up but I'm also of a mind that Ghandi and Mandela combined could not have come up with an acceptable deal on peaceful terms.

It's time for the stick. Of course if that runs it's natural process we all lose. But we now have nothing to lose.

And in regard to time. We're barely into the 70th minute when it comes to the EU and their trade deals. This will run on till March and probably be a replay.

 

[flecc]

Firstly there was no framework of leaving. It's one of the biggest stumbling blocks of the negotiations that an exit clause was in the original contract. Well actually is the biggest. Henceforth why it's such a dog's breakfast.

Yes there was framework as I pointed out, the basis that no exit deal could be better than membership. This was first specified even before the referendum vote and constantly reinforced since. Why do you think I knew Brexit would be a disaster and voted Remain? It was obvious to those of us who followed the facts rather than the propaganda from both sides.

Ireland is the other main reason we have such an impasse. They want to give us a bloody nose for historic reasons. Shame as they really will suffer much worse than us if we can't get a deal.

I fully agree where Northern Ireland is concerned. The South have sensibly made plans to alleviate any difficulties, including new ships to transport direct between Eire and their mainland EU partners.
.

 

[Fingers]

Yes there was framework as I pointed out, the basis that no exit deal could be better than membership. This was first specified even before the referendum vote and constantly reinforced since.n Why do you think I knew Brexit would be a disaster and voted Remain? It was obvious to those of us who followed the facts rather than the propaganda from both sides.



I fully agree where Northern Ireland is concerned. The South have sensibly made plans to alleviate any difficulties, including new ships to transport direct between Eire and their mainland EU partners.
.

All when and good until you realise Ireland does 80% of their exports to us.

Where will this new fleet of ships sail to? Another UK?

And when the prosecco companies find that they have lost a major market who will compensate them? The EU? Really? Of course not. That's when the negitianegot start proper. Dealing with these stuffed suits in Brussels was always doomed to fail.

 

[flecc]

Depends on what your definition of gangster is.

When Juncker was in charge of Luxembourg he did some very very corrupt practices.

Not illegal though. Certainly the ethical standards fell far short of the minimum acceptable, but that does not make someone a gangster. It just makes them opportunists. The real villains were the companies taking advantage of the opportunity to avoid taxation, UK companies figuring very prominently among them.
.

 

[tommie]

"That's rich, coming from Ireland."

You posted this incorrectly so I had to sort it for you to be able to quote.

You must be joking about an apology, Ireland has no drunks or gangsters?!!!

You might start by apologising for your unfounded accusations of there being gangsters running the EU.
.

So you don`t accept your own Terms and Conditions of the Forum (maybe you have forgotten?)

Terms of Service and Rules
Pedelecs operates a one account per person policy. You agree to not use the Service to submit or link to any Content which is defamatory, abusive, hateful, threatening, spam or spam-like, likely to offend, contains adult or objectionable content, contains personal information of others, risks copyright infringement, encourages unlawful activity, or otherwise violates any laws.

What part of that don`t you understand?
Civility costs nothing.