Brexit - Post Match Reaction

[Tamesaint]

It was about you being willing to put money on us doing a Norway style deal. Are you man enough to admit that you got that wrong

 

 

Blimey. In Les's eyes you have to be a man to admit to having made a wrong prediction. What a strange world he inhabits when only if you are "man enough" do you admit to having made a wrong prediction.

 

I suppose though that explains why Les regularly disappears from this forum after he has taken yet another pasting from the likes of Shurlock.

[Johnny Bognor]

The whole point is to create ca level playing field. You run a pub / restaurant I think. Your place only survives because your local competitors also have to pay at least minimum wage, have premises inspected for hygiene, pay business rates etc. You wouldnt accept it if the pub next door suddenly stopped doing that, undercutting you.

 

That is incredibly blinkered way of looking at things. You are assuming that a business only survives because through regulation, they are forced to follow the same rules as others.

 

The fact is, if one pub is better than the other pub, by offering customers what they want (whether that be a better product, better service, better atmosphere or better prices), that pub will prosper despite the regulations, not because of them.

 

It’s the same reason why the iPhone, owned by a US company and manufactured by the Chinese is the bestselling handset in Europe, despite there being no trade deals with either the US or the Chinese.

 

Give customers what they desire and the regulators can go **** themselves

[Winnersaint]

Thanks for that.

[Winnersaint]

That is incredibly blinkered way of looking at things. You are assuming that a business only survives because through regulation, they are forced to follow the same rules as others.

 

The fact is, if one pub is better than the other pub, by offering customers what they want (whether that be a better product, better service, better atmosphere or better prices), that pub will prosper despite the regulations, not because of them.

 

It’s the same reason why the iPhone, owned by a US company and manufactured by the Chinese is the bestselling handset in Europe, despite there being no trade deals with either the US or the Chinese.

 

Give customers what they desire and the regulators can go **** themselves

 

Even as a paraphrased vox pop quote I might be in trouble if I used that last bit in my lesson on free trade!

[shurlock]

That is incredibly blinkered way of looking at things. You are assuming that a business only survives because through regulation, they are forced to follow the same rules as others.

 

The fact is, if one pub is better than the other pub, by offering customers what they want (whether that be a better product, better service, better atmosphere or better prices), that pub will prosper despite the regulations, not because of them.

 

It’s the same reason why the iPhone, owned by a US company and manufactured by the Chinese is the bestselling handset in Europe, despite there being no trade deals with either the US or the Chinese.

 

Give customers what they desire and the regulators can go **** themselves

 

Take a class in 101 economics and educate yourself on market failures such as externalities.

[Wes Tender]

You're desperate because you keep on urging the bookies to pay up because your bet is ahead at half time. I agree Norway looks less likely than two years ago. But then so does WTO. Johnson has successfully boxed himself in. The last Parliament voted a number of times against no deal. It remains to be seen whether this Parliament will do the same

 

We've moved on rather a lot in the past few months, in case you hadn't noticed. The House has now been cleansed of the idiots who would deliberately stymie our negotiating position by telling the other party that no matter what happened, we would not leave unless we had negotiated a deal. At the same time, gone are large numbers of those who would have been content with continuing to pay into the EU coffers, accept free movement of people, and the jurisdiction of EU law over our own, all required by the Norway option. Go ahead and believe that it might still come about, but you look like a complete fool for doing so. Anybody else on here who thinks that we might yet go for the Norway option? Tamesaint? Gavyn?

[shurlock]

We've moved on rather a lot in the past few months, in case you hadn't noticed. The House has now been cleansed of the idiots who would deliberately stymie our negotiating position by telling the other party that no matter what happened, we would not leave unless we had negotiated a deal. At the same time, gone are large numbers of those who would have been content with continuing to pay into the EU coffers, accept free movement of people, and the jurisdiction of EU law over our own, all required by the Norway option. Go ahead and believe that it might still come about, but you look like a complete fool for doing so. Anybody else on here who thinks that we might yet go for the Norway option? Tamesaint? Gavyn?

 

So you’ve moved on from having your cake and eating it - preserving a similar trading relationship with the EU without being part of it and the obligations of membership? What happened Les? The German carmakers got lost on their way to Merkel’s office?

Edited 19 February, 2020 by shurlock

[Tamesaint]

So you’ve moved on from having your cake and eating it - preserving a similar trading relationship with the EU without being part of it and the obligations of membership? What happened Les? The German carmakers got lost on their way to Merkel’s office?

 

Les is not "man enough" to admit that he was wrong.

[Wes Tender]

So you’ve moved on from having your cake and eating it - preserving a similar trading relationship with the EU without being part of it and the obligations of membership? What happened Les? The German carmakers got lost on their way to Merkel’s office?

 

You must be thinking of somebody else, Gavyn. I've always been for leaving the EU since Maastricht, as I've said many times before. I've always wanted to leave the SM and the CU, so that we could take back control of our borders, our money, our laws and our trade, to put it into the well employed nutshell phrase. The situation regarding the German Car makers and other goods manufactured by them, the French agricultural products they sell to our consumers, ditto the main exports to us from other EU countries, they will naturally wish to continue selling to us. Up until recently, the EU member states, in particular the Germans, have maintained a solidarity of purpose, giving the impression that the unity of their Union is more important than the prosperity of individual industries. That facade is beginning to show cracks as it becomes clear that Boris and Frost aren't as hopeless in negotiations as May and Robbins, and there is no longer a fifth column available to abet them in the HoC any more, but instead a massive mandate to get Brexit done.

 

I linked to an interesting article earlier that discussed these cracks. It said:-

 

The German media, for example, have been and continue to be complacent about Brexit. For three years, they were in denial that Brexit would happen. They focused their reporting efforts on the second referendum campaign. The tenet of the current batch of reports is that the UK's negotiating position is irresponsible, against the interests of the EU, and therefore unrealistic.

 

We are not sure what will happen to the cohesion of the EU's position when people suddenly realise that the UK might leave on WTO terms. The UK is the single largest source of Germany's export surpluses.

 

Also:-

 

The EU is, of course, the stronger partner in the relationship but, if the talks break down and there is no deal, the EU will have no means under WTO rules to stop the import of UK goods. For so long as the UK is not bluffing, the UK is logically in a stronger negotiating position because it can unilaterally achieve its primary goal of regulatory independence, while the EU cannot achieve its opposing goal without the UK's consent. The EU can, of course, withhold a trade agreement. But, given the EU's trade surplus, such a decision would produce a net financial flow from the EU to the UK in terms of collected tariffs. We saw an estimate from the UK parliament of the order of some £6bn a year. Have EU negotiators even considered this asymmetry?

 

The number of other snippets reporting cracks in the EU's unity, whether it be MEPs' dissent towards the EU's stance against us, other member states growing increasingly unhappy about their own membership, concerns about how they will manage their budget without our contributions, these things are increasing to be reported on a daily basis as time grows shorter to the end of the year. The EU think that we will blink first before then. Time for Boris to tell them that we aren't coming to the table for talks until they stop making these stupid demands of theirs.

[whelk]

Who knew we had 8.5 million people who will now apply for jobs?

[Wes Tender]

Les is not "man enough" to admit that he was wrong.

 

You appear to have missed me asking for your opinion on whether you thought it likely whether we would be leaving the EU as part of a Norway style deal. What do you reckon? I expect that you voted to remain in the referendum, didn't vote Conservative in the recent election, may have even thought that the ERM was a good idea all those years ago. If so, there isn't much you have got right, is there?

[shurlock]

You must be thinking of somebody else, Gavyn. I've always been for leaving the EU since Maastricht, as I've said many times before. I've always wanted to leave the SM and the CU, so that we could take back control of our borders, our money, our laws and our trade, to put it into the well employed nutshell phrase. The situation regarding the German Car makers and other goods manufactured by them, the French agricultural products they sell to our consumers, ditto the main exports to us from other EU countries, they will naturally wish to continue selling to us. Up until recently, the EU member states, in particular the Germans, have maintained a solidarity of purpose, giving the impression that the unity of their Union is more important than the prosperity of individual industries. That facade is beginning to show cracks as it becomes clear that Boris and Frost aren't as hopeless in negotiations as May and Robbins, and there is no longer a fifth column available to abet them in the HoC any more, but instead a massive mandate to get Brexit done.

 

I linked to an interesting article earlier that discussed these cracks. It said:-

 

 

 

The number of other snippets reporting cracks in the EU's unity, whether it be MEPs' dissent towards the EU's stance against us, other member states growing increasingly unhappy about their own membership, concerns about how they will manage their budget without our contributions, these things are increasing to be reported on a daily basis as time grows shorter to the end of the year. The EU think that we will blink first before then. Time for Boris to tell them that we aren't coming to the table for talks until they stop making these stupid demands of theirs.

 

Deliberately sidestepping the point I see. But hey climbdowns are painful things.

[shurlock]

Les is not "man enough" to admit that he was wrong.

 

He’s an absolute mess. But who knows - now that we’re threatening to go WTO (and really we mean it), I’m sure the EU will cave and give UK the frictionless trade and the cake that the Brexiters promised.

[Lord Duckhunter]

Meh. He used Canada to illustrate an EU -Third country trade deal. There was never any suggestion any two deals would be the same. The EU were clear exactly what a trade deal would look like very shortly after May triggered Article 50 - one based on reciprocity.

 

He specifically said a trade deal wouldn’t be bespoke, and it would be based on an existing deal. In light of that, it baffles me that anyone can state “there was never any suggestion that any two deals would be the same”. You’re just clutching at straws. Saying no two deals will be the same and but you can’t have a bespoke deal is contradictory. There are only 2 options, a deal similar to an existing one or a bespoke one.

 

Clearly what’s happened is they wanted to pressure May by threatening something she wouldn’t ever agree to, Canada, but are now ****ting themselves when Boris says “yes please”.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[hypochondriac]

He specifically said a trade deal wouldn’t be bespoke, and it would be based on an existing deal. In light of that, it baffles me that anyone can state “there was never any suggestion that any two deals would be the same”. You’re just clutching at straws. Saying no two deals will be the same and but you can’t have a bespoke deal is contradictory. There are only 2 options, a deal similar to an existing one or a bespoke one.

 

Clearly what’s happened is they wanted to pressure May by threatening something she wouldn’t ever agree to, Canada, but are now ****ting themselves when Boris says “yes please”.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think you're right there.

[shurlock]

He specifically said a trade deal wouldn’t be bespoke, and it would be based on an existing deal. In light of that, it baffles me that anyone can state “there was never any suggestion that any two deals would be the same”. You’re just clutching at straws. Saying no two deals will be the same and but you can’t have a bespoke deal is contradictory. There are only 2 options, a deal similar to an existing one or a bespoke one.

 

Clearly what’s happened is they wanted to pressure May by threatening something she wouldn’t ever agree to, Canada, but are now ****ting themselves when Boris says “yes please”.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Thicker by the day.

 

By bespoke, Barnier simply meant that the UK wouldn’t be able to cherrypick the best bits of EU and that the more redlines the UK insisted on, the less market access that it would enjoy. That’s all the PowerPoint ever meant - that the UK’s redlines, as envisioned by the Lancaster House speech, pushed it towards a basic FTA - examples including (but not limited to) Canada and South Korea. Basic FTAs that focus on tariff and quota elimination will have certain shared features but that doesn’t mean that each one will literally be the same (a MLG-type nonsequitur).

 

Of course, at the time, you completely rubbished Barnier’s ppt and the suggestion that there was a trade-off between market access and sovereignty. After all, the UK’s alleged upper hand meant it could have its proverbial cake and eat it - that fighting talk looks idiotic, embarrassing and delusional by the day as now recognised by members of the government. Don’t say we didn’t warn you.

 

Let’s be clear, from 2017 onwards, Barnier made it clear that the size and proximity of the UK meant it would not be treated like Canada. That’s been repeated at various stages, including the Political Declaration last October which the government signed up to -along with various level playing field conditions.

 

The PD is not legally binding (unlike the NI Protocol which incidentally has some nasty little surprises on state aid not just for NI but the entire UK that may come back to haunt you https://www.ft.com/content/c606c934-4a72-11ea-95a0-43d18ec715f5). Still it has more authority than the disingenuous whining from No. 10 which you’ve bought quicker than a Laura Kuennsberg fake news tweet

 

See Peter Foster of the Daily Telegraph who has tweeted on the subject and demolished your little case.

 

Let’s also be clear that the UK isn’t even asking for a Canada FTA. It wants market access that is much more extensive, including tariff-free, quota-free trade on all products — even for sensitive parts of the agriculture sector such as beef and dairy. By definition the EU will demand more concessions for that additional access.

 

Regarding your final point, all Johnson has done by pretending the political declaration doesn’t exist and downplaying the commitments in the NI protocol (no checks in the Irish Sea) is signal to the EU that the UK cannot be trusted, leading it to believe it needs to take a more hardline position (I expect it to soften, though not massively). Along with the refusal to extend the transition under any circumstance, the UK has reduced its room for manœuvre and made a suboptimal outcome for all more (the EU included) likely even before negotiations have started.

 

Ultimately it’s all moot. It’s a negotiation and each side can demand what it likes as it perceives its own interests. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen little fella.

Edited 19 February, 2020 by shurlock

[Tamesaint]

You appear to have missed me asking for your opinion on whether you thought it likely whether we would be leaving the EU as part of a Norway style deal. What do you reckon? I expect that you voted to remain in the referendum, didn't vote Conservative in the recent election, may have even thought that the ERM was a good idea all those years ago. If so, there isn't much you have got right, is there?

 

No. I don't think that we will leave the EU with a Norway style deal.

[Wes Tender]

No. I don't think that we will leave the EU with a Norway style deal.

 

That's very sensible. How about Gavyn? What do you reckon, Norway style deal a possibility? Any takers apart from Timmy?

[Lord Duckhunter]

That's very sensible. How about Gavyn? What do you reckon, Norway style deal a possibility? Any takers apart from Timmy?

 

Stephen Glover writes in The Mail today “If they can't grasp how enormously things have changed, they have a shock coming to them.” He wrote it about The Eu, but I think it should apply to some of the remoaners on here.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Tamesaint]

That's very sensible. How about Gavyn? What do you reckon, Norway style deal a possibility? Any takers apart from Timmy?

 

Blimey Les. You really are a mess. Why on earth are you banging on about a Norway style deal? Is there a history of autism in your family?

 

 

Tell me. Who do you think will win the Premier League this season and who would you like to see win the Premier League this season?

[whelk]

Blimey Les. You really are a mess. Why on earth are you banging on about a Norway style deal? Is there a history of autism in your family?

 

 

Tell me. Who do you think will win the Premier League this season and who would you like to see win the Premier League this season?

 

Classy using autism as an insult.

[Tamesaint]

Classy using autism as an insult.

 

It was a genuine question. Les's obsession about something like a Norway style deal is a classic sign of autism. Apologies if that offended you.

[Wes Tender]

Stephen Glover writes in The Mail today “If they can't grasp how enormously things have changed, they have a shock coming to them.” He wrote it about The Eu, but I think it should apply to some of the remoaners on here.

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Yes, I think so too. They seem to think that we still have the incompetent negotiating team of May and Robbins in charge and that we will fold at the last minute because they mistakenly believe us to bluffing when we say that we will leave with no deal if we don't get a FTA we are happy with. They remind me of the Japanese soldiers deep in he jungle who haven't realised that the war is over.

 

Chief among the remoaners on here who doesn't accept that our position has improved immeasurably, is Gavyn, who diminishes the gravity of his pronouncements by littering them with playground level insults. He is full of opinion as to what we want out of the negotiations and indeed what we don't want, as if he is still as close to the government inner circles as he was in the Blair era. I very much doubt that he is, so he is just expressing opinions based on listening to the views of others who he believes have some inside knowledge, which is what we do on the other side. Boris has apparently painted himself into a corner by stating that the deadline will not be extended beyond 31st December, is one point of view. The other is that Boris has painted the EU into a corner. The EU has stipulated its conditions, so have we. The ball is in their court, and for the first time we have a very strong hand. If the EU fail to recognise that, then more fool them.

 

Ultimately it’s all moot. It’s a negotiation and each side can demand what it likes as it perceives its own interests

 

This is the only really relevant part of Gavyn's little diatribe above. It is futile raking over old coals from during May's time in office, as the whole political landscape has changed since then and the sooner the EU recognise that, the sooner a mutually beneficial solution can be agreed.

[Wes Tender]

Is there a history of autism in your family?

 

You really are a piece of work, aren't you?

[Fan The Flames]

Classy using autism as an insult.

 

But it's ok when MLG is called it, yes.

[hypochondriac]

But it's ok when MLG is called it, yes.

Tbf that's not an insult, he genuinely is.

[hypochondriac]

We're just like Canada we are.

That graph is being widely mocked and criticised for being at best misleading.

[Tamesaint]

You really are a piece of work, aren't you?

 

Amazing. Les can make a post which isn't several paragraphs long and doesn't turn everyone asleep.

[Wes Tender]

That graph is being widely mocked and criticised for being at best misleading.

 

Yes, apparently the UK trade with the EU is shown as 16 times the size of Japan's, whereas it should be only four times bigger. It must be because we are very close to the EU, whereas Japan is on the other side of the World, so the Japan dot looks so much smaller because it is much further away.

 

[Wes Tender]

Amazing. Les can make a post which isn't several paragraphs long and doesn't turn everyone asleep.

 

I have told you many, many times before. Stop bleating and put me on ignore. See, another short post and to the point.

 

PS "turn everyone asleep" - poor grammar.

[Tamesaint]

I have told you many, many times before. Stop bleating and put me on ignore. See, another short post and to the point.

 

PS "turn everyone asleep" - poor grammar.

 

Why should I put you on ignore?? I find you so amusing.

[shurlock]

Edit

Edited 20 February, 2020 by shurlock

[shurlock]

Yes, I think so too. They seem to think that we still have the incompetent negotiating team of May and Robbins in charge and that we will fold at the last minute because they mistakenly believe us to bluffing when we say that we will leave with no deal if we don't get a FTA we are happy with. They remind me of the Japanese soldiers deep in he jungle who haven't realised that the war is over.

 

Chief among the remoaners on here who doesn't accept that our position has improved immeasurably, is Gavyn, who diminishes the gravity of his pronouncements by littering them with playground level insults. He is full of opinion as to what we want out of the negotiations and indeed what we don't want, as if he is still as close to the government inner circles as he was in the Blair era. I very much doubt that he is, so he is just expressing opinions based on listening to the views of others who he believes have some inside knowledge, which is what we do on the other side. Boris has apparently painted himself into a corner by stating that the deadline will not be extended beyond 31st December, is one point of view. The other is that Boris has painted the EU into a corner. The EU has stipulated its conditions, so have we. The ball is in their court, and for the first time we have a very strong hand. If the EU fail to recognise that, then more fool them.

 

 

 

This is the only really relevant part of Gavyn's little diatribe above. It is futile raking over old coals from during May's time in office, as the whole political landscape has changed since then and the sooner the EU recognise that, the sooner a mutually beneficial solution can be agreed.

 

If the UK doesn’t secure frictionless trade and passporting (now renamed permanent equivalence) and all the other things that Brexiters claimed were perfectly feasible, the UK will have failed in its negotiations. Time to deliver instead of climbing down pal.

Edited 20 February, 2020 by shurlock

[Wes Tender]

Why should I put you on ignore?? I find you so amusing.

 

On the one hand my posts are too long and send you to sleep. On the other hand you find them amusing. Make your mind up. You seem confused.

[Tamesaint]

On the one hand my posts are too long and send you to sleep. On the other hand you find them amusing. Make your mind up. You seem confused.

 

Not at all. The intensity of your dislike for "Remoaners" and your humourless passion for the Brexit cause are amusing. The droning style of your posts turn me and I dare say most other people to sleep.

[Wes Tender]

Not at all. The intensity of your dislike for "Remoaners" and your humourless passion for the Brexit cause are amusing. The droning style of your posts turn me and I dare say most other people to sleep.

 

Either go to sleep, or burst out laughing. As I say, make your mind up. I accept the position of those remainers who for their own reasons voted to stay in the EU, it was their choice. I have nothing but contempt for those remoaners who can't accept the democratic referendum vote to leave and who constantly bleat like spoilt children about how unfair it all is and how they hope that the UK fares badly in our negotiations so that they can say that they told us so.

 

Does passion for a cause have to be accompanied with humour? I never knew. If it is serious, i.e. lacking in humour, is it then amusing? You contradict yourself in every other sentence. As I say, you're confused.

[hypochondriac]

Here's the corrected graph with the US and China added in.

[badgerx16]

Here's the corrected graph with the US and China added in.

 

Do the Russian and Swiss bubbles look as if they are less than half the size of the UK one, and the Japanese one a quarter the size, ( which they should be ).

[shurlock]

Here's the corrected graph with the US and China added in.

 

Not sure what point this is trying to make.

[Johnny Bognor]

Not sure what point this is trying to make.

 

I guess it shows that the EU, whilst striking a deal with Canada, has completely failed in getting anything important with two major trading partners, who are a similar distance away?

[sandwichsaint]

Not sure what point this is trying to make.

 

Does it show that despite being huge trading blocks US and China do 'relatively' little trade with EU, not vastly more than UK does, one possible reason being that they are a long way away?

Any trade lost from the current setup will need to be replaced by trade with those other blue balls, many of which are geographically distant.

The size of the UK's ball vis-a-vis the EU cuts both ways, but it's hard to see from this graphic how we hold all the cards.

[buctootim]

Here's the corrected graph with the US and China added in.

 

So what you're saying is geography and frictionless trade really does matter? Despite having economies around 8 times bigger the US and China have only slightly more trade with the EU. To avoid losing this advantage the UK should maintain frictionless trade. Is that your point?

[buctootim]

I guess it shows that the EU, whilst striking a deal with Canada, has completely failed in getting anything important with two major trading partners, who are a similar distance away?

 

Not the US which has failed then? Given that the EU has 40 deals with 70 countries and the US has 17 deals with 20 countries who would you think is responsible?

[Weston Super Saint]

If the UK doesn’t secure frictionless trade and passporting (now renamed permanent equivalence) and all the other things that Brexiters claimed were perfectly feasible, the UK will have failed in its negotiations. Time to deliver instead of climbing down pal.

 

Both are still 'feasible', pal. Whether they are 'achievable' is another matter, given that there are two sides involved in the negotiation, one can simply say 'no, non, nein' and the talks are scuppered.

 

Hope that helps clear the matter up for you.

[shurlock]

Both are still 'feasible', pal. Whether they are 'achievable' is another matter, given that there are two sides involved in the negotiation, one can simply say 'no, non, nein' and the talks are scuppered.

 

Hope that helps clear the matter up for you.

 

 

We were told we hold all the cards, we can have our cake and eat it and they need us more than we need them. It’s time for Brexiters to deliver on their claims -see Raab earlier this month for a masterclass in pure delusion (supposedly we can have frictionless trade and regulatory divergence as it’s all in the WA and PD). No more excuses pal.

Edited 20 February, 2020 by shurlock
You might want to learn the meaning of feasible while you’re at it.

[badgerx16]

- there are no more excuses.

Oh, I'm sure there will be.

[aintforever]

Both are still 'feasible', pal. Whether they are 'achievable' is another matter, given that there are two sides involved in the negotiation, one can simply say 'no, non, nein' and the talks are scuppered.

 

Hope that helps clear the matter up for you.

 

I thought it was supposed to be the easiest trade deal in history?

[shurlock]

It’s absolutely delicious watching the climbdown in train. Such big talk from such little men. It was only ever going to end one way.

[buctootim]

It’s absolutely delicious watching the climbdown in train. Such big talk from such little men. It was only ever going to end one way.

 

It's childlike. First the refusal to listen to anybody suggesting unicorns don't exist. Then blaming everybody but themselves when it turns out they don't.

[buctootim]

I thought it was supposed to be the easiest trade deal in history?

 

"Coming to a free trade agreement with the EU should be "one of the easiest in human history" because our rules and laws are already the same, the international trade secretary has said." Liam Fox.

 

Kin difficult if you insist on dumping that existing alignment though....