Jump to content

The Consequences of Brexit [part 5] Read 1st post before posting


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, woodview said:

Our ex-chancellor Osborne, 'warned' what would happen, then left to work for Blackrock on £650k per year for 1 day per week. He was far from happy that people had rejected his global capitalist goals, but comforted himself in his new job.

So he isn't entitled to work now?  

7 hours ago, Car Boot said:

The mostly poorer, hitherto ignored but now abused,

So the poorer will be better off outside the EU? Is that what you are saying?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lockdoctor said:

The reality is Trump isn't going to waste his time discussing future trade deals with the UK when he knows the UK will be trapped in the Customs Union forever,  if the UK  sign up to Mrs May's deal.

Mays deal means the UK is free to negotiate any trade deals it wants when it formally leaves the EU on March 29, 2019.

 

Of course, Obama was correct when he stated the UK would go to the back of the queue, the USA is far more interested in a deal with the EU, as is every other nation we're potentially going to be making deals with. They also want to know what our relationship with the EU is going to be going forward before any commitments can be made. The UK isn't as attractive outside of the EU, naturally.

 

The only reason Trump thinks Mays deal would make any deal with the US difficult, is entirely because he wants to make it so.

 

Trump won't sign any deal with the UK unless the UK lowers it's food and animal welfare standards, a goal his administration has already stated would be central to any potential deal.

 

That would make a hard border in NI inevitable.

 

There is no deal the USA will make with the UK while Trump is President, regardless of Mays proposed deal (IMV).

 

The UK's refusal to lower standards (as promised by Gove in his governmental capacity) would prevent it, it's very unpopular with the public, and Trump doesn't like looking weak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Dardandec said:

So he isn't entitled to work now?  

So the poorer will be better off outside the EU? Is that what you are saying?

I have seen no evidence that the affluence of the workers in the EU's member states is increased by virtue of that membership. 

 

I have seen evidence that the affluent middle-classes and the rich are increasingly better off due to their nation's EU membership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, L00b said:

Except, I'm neither uninformed, nor do I hold a preconceived opinion: my opinion is informed by your media, government messages and actions, and politicians' words and policies.

 

The difference, and the irony, is that you are either uninformed, or unwilling to get better informed, about the extent of the prejudice sufferred by EU immigrants in the UK since before the referendum. You looked up those #alreadynotfine and #inlimbo hashtags yet? Nah, I didn't think so.

Except, I'm not intolerant towards Leavers: I engage them with challenging their opinions with facts and counter-arguments.

 

For the rest of it, grow a thicker skin. I've got years' worth of "cheese eating surrender monkey" posts levelled at France and French people on this here forum alone: do you see me outraged? Is the real problem with the boot when it's on the other foot?

The huge irony is your xenophobia. I know there is hate crime in the uk, perpetrated by a sick minded minority. That doesn't define a nation. Your way of thinking is exactly the methodology used by racists who tar all muslims because of the actions of a tiny minority of extremists.

The fact similar extremists have said hurtful things to you, doesn't make it right for you to deride a nation.

I'm not thin skinned or outraged, I just feel justified in calling out anyone who sees thinks it's ok to insult a whole country based on the actions of a minority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dardandec said:

So he isn't entitled to work now?  

So the poorer will be better off outside the EU? Is that what you are saying?

On balance I reckon those on low incomes will be better off after the initial adjustment.

 

Why does the EU pitting low paid worker against low paid worker make the poor better off? (It doesn't). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Car Boot said:

I have seen no evidence that the affluence of the workers in the EU's member states is increased by virtue of that membership.

Of course, that wasn't the question asked ... but I think we can divine the answer you don't want to give from it;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the Guardian, May's short 186 MPs to get the WA through. I just can't see her getting that squared within the next 2 weeks. 

 

A second referendum is now also getting most unlikely, given the timescales. Officialdom noises reported at tonight's embassy event about Brexit put the referendum at mid-March 2019 if they started straight after the 11 Dec meaningful vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, truman said:

Carboot doesn't care about the poor ... They just want the better off to be poorer...

Poster was quoting me in first part, for commenting on our ex chancellors new £650k 1 day a week job. I've never posred about reducing the well off, so, if your comment us about me, it's wrong. Do I want the low paid to be in a better position? Yes.

Edited by woodview
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.