they can't even convince themselves.
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
Perhaps I can explain in non judgemental language. The 500 page WA document ,otherwise jnown as the Deal, provides a legally sound way of dealing with that and other issues. It was negotiated by those people legally authorised on behalf of the UK to so do. It is the agreement which if passed by the UK parliament ,would also be passed in its entirety by the EU parliament.
That puts it unto a completely different league from non legal proposals and verbal assurances ,uttered during debates
They have done, see OG's response above.
In fact the EU responded first with guarantees on our peoples security in their countries, it was the UK which was unwilling to reciprocate, and still is. For example charging a hefty registration fee for EU nationals here to be able to stay. We've now been shamed into cancelling the fee, but still require the long, detailed registration which is only printed in English at present.
As for the use of the word Liar, Fingers regularly uses that to others when he disagrees, even when he's wrong.
N.B. Crossed with Danidl's response.
.
Given the level of uncertainty around what the situation will be - no I would not short farm stock. That takes nothing away from the basic argument here - which seems so obvious I don't know why you're taking issue with it........ which is...... if subsidies are removed and farms go bust because they can't compete - then farm land value will fall - and it is land owners (ie the rich) who will suffer.the price of farmland varies even before the referendum.
in order to quantify the brexit factor, import duty, regulatory regime, planning law, available farm labour, exchange rates and even annual rainfall need to be factored into your model.
If you say price = function of (import duty), that looks plausible but in practice, that function is impossible to be coded as a one to one relationship. Economic models are essentially complex. Anyone tries to simplify it runs a very big risk. Would you short farmland stock at the moment?
And no food is produced, these ideas you push are not merely stupid but dangerous
Pure fantasy, the only trade deal we could get in that time would be an American take over
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/02/meps-urge-eu-leaders-to-protect-rights-of-britons-living-in-europe
You are so blind to facts against your blessed EU that it seems you are part of a cult.
We have given right to stay for all EU citizens here regardless of any deals. The EU are holding ours hostage.
It’s disgusting whatever way you voted.
Stop telling lies please. Countries are sovereign in who has rights of residency or not, not the EU. Didn't they teach you how the EU works at school yet? Does mummy know you are on the computer again?
think about it. If your method is unsound, your assumption is against empirical data then the conclusion is valueless.
You've studied bio-chemistry? then you are familiar with the rate of reaction. You could say: increasing the concentration of reactants leads to higher rate of reaction. That's forgetting the pressure, temperature, pH, solvent, surface tension, porosity of the substrate, buffers, presence of catalysts/inhibitors and even gravity and radiation may have an influence.
Fingers, your crocodile tears are touching. Remember it is the UK which prevented their citizens living in mainland Europe and Ireland from voting. The EU did put all these citizen rights into the agreement,but it is the UK which have not ratified it. So logically they have completed their part of the deal. The EU had every right to expect that a Deal would be ratified, as late as two weeks ago!.
The Commission has requested , at this late stage,that the individual Countries will augment their arrangements. . It is now far to late to go through the standard Commission + Parliament Directive route.
There is of course no problem with the EU country with the largest UK ex pat population.. The UK Ireland common area is long established.
France is well along a route to cover the contingency.
Stop lying, you haven't. I don't do rage, I am just being a twat, that is what you wanted isn't it?
No - maybe not - we will get our food from elsewhere. Just like you do now. You don't grow your own food do you? No. Just expand your horizon.
Not if all those other factors are kept constant - doh.
And what method are you talking about anyway? All we're saying is if farmers go bust their land value will fall (who will want to buy farm land only zoned for farming when you can't make a profit out of farming?) - so rents will fall so landowner will suffer...
Why you are taking issue with this I fail to see.
You started off by saying Tim's article was full of incorrect facts. So far all you've demonstrated is ....... well nothing much.
Where are the facts Tim got wrong?
Show me one fact he got wrong.
Not opinion - fact. You said it was factually incorrect.
People who admit to being a twat are not true twats.
A true twat will never admit to being a twat.
I see.
I have a friend who lives on the outskirts of Pau in France. He moved there in 2011. His treatment by the French authorities is nothing short of disgusting. He has encountered rudeness, obstacles, hostility when trying to deal with his residency, healthcare, property purchase and virtually everything else on a day to day basis. It is totally shameful and falls well below the standards that a French citizen would experience here.
I don’t understand why people attack the British system at every opportunity and yet turn a blind eye to the way British people living in other EU countries are treated.
I think EU citizens here in the UK get a better deal and more post Brexit reassurances than their British counterparts abroad. The French are disgusting in their approach, they are a complete disgrace.
but you cannot isolate only one factor, in this case, import duty on food commodities.
Like biologic systems, there are plenty of feedback mechanisms in economic modelling, positive feedback and negative feedback. If and when some tariff is reduced, import of the relevant products may go up, causing changes in land use, regulation, subsidies, movement of labour and more. If you equate economy with an in vitro experiment, you get to fantasy land. That's what people like Tim W do. They fancy themselves as scientists but lack of credibility because they are naive.
Oh come on, I'm trying hard to learn! He seemed so keen on me being one, maybe he is lonely?
And find another 52% without trade deals that would be a stupid thing to do