Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"More britex scare mongering ....my Mrs refused to shag last night ..i will blame that on britex as well ...had enough ...we voted leave just move on ...out is out" The level of debate is outstanding. Where do you stand on President Erdogan of Turkey wanting to do a trade deal with us. But as part of that wanting visa free travel for his citizens? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"More britex scare mongering ....my Mrs refused to shag last night ..i will blame that on britex as well ...had enough ...we voted leave just move on ...out is out" Lol great idea Now convince the uk government to negotiate a trade deal with the eu It's going to be the easiest trade deal ever , I know there busy shooting them selves in the feet and arguing about what to ask for in a trade deal ,and how they are planning to work customs arrangements , but it might be time to tell them that time is running out , they are meant to be in negotiations next week , and have customs agreement with the eu in a month , just to get the withdrawal treaty so you don't fall off a cliff edge while you're leaving , | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Have just read an article in the Telegraph so not a remain paper. It states that the U.S. are going to use trade deal to increase the cost of medicine to the NHS. Trump is of the opinion US drugs are too cheap! So much for the special relationship. Next time they go to war and want allies to join them (Iraq, Afghanistan etc) we should tell them to ...." That's not exactly what the article said! Trump intends to propose raising medicine prices to ALL foreign countries that buy drugs from the USA. This is to try and subsidise healthcare to Americans, and conveniently just before the 2020 Presidential elections. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"More britex scare mongering ....my Mrs refused to shag last night ..i will blame that on britex as well ...had enough ...we voted leave just move on ...out is out" lets hope you respect her decision and make no attempt to reverse it in the future.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Have just read an article in the Telegraph so not a remain paper. It states that the U.S. are going to use trade deal to increase the cost of medicine to the NHS. Trump is of the opinion US drugs are too cheap! So much for the special relationship. Next time they go to war and want allies to join them (Iraq, Afghanistan etc) we should tell them to .... That's not exactly what the article said! Trump intends to propose raising medicine prices to ALL foreign countries that buy drugs from the USA. This is to try and subsidise healthcare to Americans, and conveniently just before the 2020 Presidential elections." thats not quite what he said either..... trump somehow "believes" that the cost of medicine in the US is a lot higher because european countries are threatening pharma... when actually the real reason why european countries can get drugs cheaper is because their bulk buying power means they can get them at a cheaper rate... irony of that being that he actually has potentially the biggest bulk buyer of medicines in his grasp in "medicare".. but trump specifically banned them for doing such deals as it would put the us private healthcare providers at a disadvantage | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The first major loss? Most of the Companies operating in the Forex Derivatives market have already been setting up in Amsterdam, and have been for months! No job losses in London from this move. " What about tax revenues? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The first major loss? Most of the Companies operating in the Forex Derivatives market have already been setting up in Amsterdam, and have been for months! No job losses in London from this move. " The latest Office for National statistics (ONS) figures for jobs released yesterday shows that the overall number of jobs went up in the 3 months from October to December 2017 and went up again in the 3 months from January to March 2018. Total number of people employed increased and total number of unemployed in the UK decreased. Figures from the ONS....There were 32.34 million people in work between January and March 2018, 197,000 more than for October to December 2017 and 396,000 more employed than this time last year. The employment rate is Currently the highest since comparable records began in 1971. The unemployment rate is at its lowest since 1975. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The first major loss? Most of the Companies operating in the Forex Derivatives market have already been setting up in Amsterdam, and have been for months! No job losses in London from this move. What about tax revenues? " What type of taxes are you referring to ? The margins on FX trading are small in any event . Would profits not be taxed on a remittance basis in any event so there would be no loss of taxes from anyone domiciled in the UK. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The first major loss? Most of the Companies operating in the Forex Derivatives market have already been setting up in Amsterdam, and have been for months! No job losses in London from this move. What about tax revenues? What type of taxes are you referring to ? The margins on FX trading are small in any event . Would profits not be taxed on a remittance basis in any event so there would be no loss of taxes from anyone domiciled in the UK. " The taxes paid and anticipated by this Company are published annually. The U.K. Treasury loses BIG TIME when a profitable U.K. Company like this one moves away. I would have thought the most specialist financial publications read by certain posters would explain this in their bread and butter A-Z explanation about how things work. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The first major loss? Most of the Companies operating in the Forex Derivatives market have already been setting up in Amsterdam, and have been for months! No job losses in London from this move. The latest Office for National statistics (ONS) figures for jobs released yesterday shows that the overall number of jobs went up in the 3 months from October to December 2017 and went up again in the 3 months from January to March 2018. Total number of people employed increased and total number of unemployed in the UK decreased. Figures from the ONS....There were 32.34 million people in work between January and March 2018, 197,000 more than for October to December 2017 and 396,000 more employed than this time last year. The employment rate is Currently the highest since comparable records began in 1971. The unemployment rate is at its lowest since 1975. " ONS figures also show wages have risen this year above the rate of inflation at the highest rate since 2015. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I must be reading a different part as the three month total earnings is unchanged from last year. Between January to March 2017 and January to March 2018, in real terms (that is, adjusted for consumer price inflation), regular pay for employees in Great Britain increased by 0.4% but total pay for employees in Great Britain was unchanged." It’s ok - this is called deflection. Brexiters deflect from a troublesome story by pointing out an entirely unrelated story. This story is purely about a Company that currently pays U.K. tax on a turnover of $300 billion per day (approx $1.1 trillion per year). This affects every man, woman and child in this country because the anticipated £1.5 billion ($2 billion) in taxes that go to health, teaching and other U.K. benefits will now be lost to Ireland. Where is the Brexit dividend? If Brexit will save £350 million a week - we have just lost one tenth of that from just one company decamping. They won’t be the last and far from a Brexit dividend, the loss to the Treasury from Brexit will affect us all in a very meaningful way - higher, much higher taxes. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The first major loss? Most of the Companies operating in the Forex Derivatives market have already been setting up in Amsterdam, and have been for months! No job losses in London from this move. What about tax revenues? What type of taxes are you referring to ? The margins on FX trading are small in any event . Would profits not be taxed on a remittance basis in any event so there would be no loss of taxes from anyone domiciled in the UK. The taxes paid and anticipated by this Company are published annually. The U.K. Treasury loses BIG TIME when a profitable U.K. Company like this one moves away. I would have thought the most specialist financial publications read by certain posters would explain this in their bread and butter A-Z explanation about how things work." Thanks for the information. The accounts of Reuters are at least 110 pages and the tax note does not readily identify the amount of taxes paid ( if any ) in various different countries. Probably the most interesting point in the notes was the disclosure on leased and freehold properties . They are consolidating four offices into one and taking on extra space . This is hardly the action of a company who are contracting their UK operations . It looks like we have nothing to worry about . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I must be reading a different part as the three month total earnings is unchanged from last year. Between January to March 2017 and January to March 2018, in real terms (that is, adjusted for consumer price inflation), regular pay for employees in Great Britain increased by 0.4% but total pay for employees in Great Britain was unchanged. It’s ok - this is called deflection. Brexiters deflect from a troublesome story by pointing out an entirely unrelated story. This story is purely about a Company that currently pays U.K. tax on a turnover of $300 billion per day (approx $1.1 trillion per year). This affects every man, woman and child in this country because the anticipated £1.5 billion ($2 billion) in taxes that go to health, teaching and other U.K. benefits will now be lost to Ireland. Where is the Brexit dividend? If Brexit will save £350 million a week - we have just lost one tenth of that from just one company decamping. They won’t be the last and far from a Brexit dividend, the loss to the Treasury from Brexit will affect us all in a very meaningful way - higher, much higher taxes. " Is this tax charge disclosed in the accounts or where does the figure come from ? When I analysed the tax note in the accounts I was unable to identify it . | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I must be reading a different part as the three month total earnings is unchanged from last year. Between January to March 2017 and January to March 2018, in real terms (that is, adjusted for consumer price inflation), regular pay for employees in Great Britain increased by 0.4% but total pay for employees in Great Britain was unchanged. It’s ok - this is called deflection. Brexiters deflect from a troublesome story by pointing out an entirely unrelated story. This story is purely about a Company that currently pays U.K. tax on a turnover of $300 billion per day (approx $1.1 trillion per year). This affects every man, woman and child in this country because the anticipated £1.5 billion ($2 billion) in taxes that go to health, teaching and other U.K. benefits will now be lost to Ireland. Where is the Brexit dividend? If Brexit will save £350 million a week - we have just lost one tenth of that from just one company decamping. They won’t be the last and far from a Brexit dividend, the loss to the Treasury from Brexit will affect us all in a very meaningful way - higher, much higher taxes. Is this tax charge disclosed in the accounts or where does the figure come from ? When I analysed the tax note in the accounts I was unable to identify it . " How much tax did you identify from the $1.1 trillion turnover? Do you see that as a loss or a good riddance and give them a kick as they leave? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I must be reading a different part as the three month total earnings is unchanged from last year. Between January to March 2017 and January to March 2018, in real terms (that is, adjusted for consumer price inflation), regular pay for employees in Great Britain increased by 0.4% but total pay for employees in Great Britain was unchanged. It’s ok - this is called deflection. Brexiters deflect from a troublesome story by pointing out an entirely unrelated story. This story is purely about a Company that currently pays U.K. tax on a turnover of $300 billion per day (approx $1.1 trillion per year). This affects every man, woman and child in this country because the anticipated £1.5 billion ($2 billion) in taxes that go to health, teaching and other U.K. benefits will now be lost to Ireland. Where is the Brexit dividend? If Brexit will save £350 million a week - we have just lost one tenth of that from just one company decamping. They won’t be the last and far from a Brexit dividend, the loss to the Treasury from Brexit will affect us all in a very meaningful way - higher, much higher taxes. " 300 Billion per day, for 52 weeks per year, 5 days per week, is 75 Trillion, not 1.1 Trillion. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Have just read an article in the Telegraph so not a remain paper. It states that the U.S. are going to use trade deal to increase the cost of medicine to the NHS. Trump is of the opinion US drugs are too cheap! So much for the special relationship. Next time they go to war and want allies to join them (Iraq, Afghanistan etc) we should tell them to ...." Britain has been deluded for years about a "special relationship". The only special relationship with the US is that of Israel. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tax is not based on turn over tho is it £X billions looks great but tax £27 million Op trying to mislead and jobs an tech stay in London " No, but if your turnover is a $1 trillion or thereabouts - it is a reasonable assumption that there will be a bucketfull of tax to pay on even the smallest profit margins. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Thomson Reuters have had enough of the uncertainty and applied for a licence to move their business from London to Dublin because of the anticipated loss of passporting rights. With $300 billion of forex trade conducted DAILY - this will be a catastrophe for UK Treasury revenues. A spokesman for Thomson Reuters said “We will endeavour not to place any additional requirements or burdens on our clients, thus ensuring a full continuation of services without disruption.” What will be next? My money would be ona major car manufacturer." Forex derivative trading. Not their whole business. They trade $300 billion a day. I.e. they move $300 billion of other people's money around. They make money from doing that, obviously, but clearly not $300 billion, a day! Spot trading that trades $100 billion a day is staying in London. And as they are a Canadian company, they probably pay tax in Canada or somewhere off-shore, and not the UK. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tax is not based on turn over tho is it £X billions looks great but tax £27 million Op trying to mislead and jobs an tech stay in London " Well the tax figure in their accounts of £27m is just the tax on their operating profit. Other taxes that they are liable for arent listed seperately so there will be more than £27m a year but I couldnt confirm how much that would be. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. " The days of trading floors are long gone. Most trades are carried out electronically now. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tax is not based on turn over tho is it £X billions looks great but tax £27 million Op trying to mislead and jobs an tech stay in London Well the tax figure in their accounts of £27m is just the tax on their operating profit. Other taxes that they are liable for arent listed seperately so there will be more than £27m a year but I couldnt confirm how much that would be." It isn't £27 million. Thomson Reuters are a massive group. They are only moving forex derivatives, not the rest of the business, and you won't be able to find out how much they make and how much tax they paid on the forex derivatives trading part of their business. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. The days of trading floors are long gone. Most trades are carried out electronically now. " Are you saying there will be no job losses/moves as a result of this action? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. " the processing stays in London as do associated jobs | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. The days of trading floors are long gone. Most trades are carried out electronically now. Are you saying there will be no job losses/moves as a result of this action?" Who knows. That's the point. Unless you have actually worked there, you can't tell. I thought that trading floors were full of people running around, waving their arms and speaking into multiple phones at once, whilst staring at a bank of screens. It just isn't like that anymore. And there are 150 licences for this type of trading in London. More than anywhere else in Europe and only Thomson Reuters are moving, and a private equity firm took a large stake in them earlier in the year, so who is to say what the real reason for the move is. Brexit can be a great excuse for many things. Blame Brexit and financial passporting. Sounds better than saying - rent, rates, and wages are cheaper in Ireland. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tax is not based on turn over tho is it £X billions looks great but tax £27 million Op trying to mislead and jobs an tech stay in London Well the tax figure in their accounts of £27m is just the tax on their operating profit. Other taxes that they are liable for arent listed seperately so there will be more than £27m a year but I couldnt confirm how much that would be. It isn't £27 million. Thomson Reuters are a massive group. They are only moving forex derivatives, not the rest of the business, and you won't be able to find out how much they make and how much tax they paid on the forex derivatives trading part of their business. " It is £27 million because if you read what was posted here you'd see that Thomson Reuters has split their business in to subsidiaries for the different businesses they operate in the UK. The £27 million tax is on the operating profits of their ForEx business only. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. " Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tax is not based on turn over tho is it £X billions looks great but tax £27 million Op trying to mislead and jobs an tech stay in London Well the tax figure in their accounts of £27m is just the tax on their operating profit. Other taxes that they are liable for arent listed seperately so there will be more than £27m a year but I couldnt confirm how much that would be. It isn't £27 million. Thomson Reuters are a massive group. They are only moving forex derivatives, not the rest of the business, and you won't be able to find out how much they make and how much tax they paid on the forex derivatives trading part of their business. It is £27 million because if you read what was posted here you'd see that Thomson Reuters has split their business in to subsidiaries for the different businesses they operate in the UK. The £27 million tax is on the operating profits of their ForEx business only." £27 million is peanuts in the grand scheme of things. One high profile Premier league player could generate that amount in tax receipts from transfer fee alone this summer or pay that amount in tax in one season from his wages. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. " Is the population bigger than 1971? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. The days of trading floors are long gone. Most trades are carried out electronically now. Are you saying there will be no job losses/moves as a result of this action? Who knows. That's the point. Unless you have actually worked there, you can't tell. I thought that trading floors were full of people running around, waving their arms and speaking into multiple phones at once, whilst staring at a bank of screens. It just isn't like that anymore. And there are 150 licences for this type of trading in London. More than anywhere else in Europe and only Thomson Reuters are moving, and a private equity firm took a large stake in them earlier in the year, so who is to say what the real reason for the move is. Brexit can be a great excuse for many things. Blame Brexit and financial passporting. Sounds better than saying - rent, rates, and wages are cheaper in Ireland." Oh, so you are accusing them of deliberately lying to investors? That's pretty serious. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tax is not based on turn over tho is it £X billions looks great but tax £27 million Op trying to mislead and jobs an tech stay in London No, but if your turnover is a $1 trillion or thereabouts - it is a reasonable assumption that there will be a bucketfull of tax to pay on even the smallest profit margins." 27 million....as has already been pointed out. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? " That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage." Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. " Thomson Reuters have already said that they are wishing to recruit people for their new Dublin office, and that all jobs in London will remain. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"This might sort the customs problem, https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2018/0516/963831-eu-customs-union/" Well this is what I and many others said would be the result of the December agreement. Its the only way for May to maintain the agreements with the EU and the DUP. No idea how she'll get the cabinet on board though since she's made the decision to staff them with muppets. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? " Yes but people like you said employment overall would decrease and unemployment overall would increase after a Leave vote. In fact quite the opposite has happened, and overall employment has increased and unemployment has decreased since the vote to leave in 2016. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post?" Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. " And How about in your post? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. And How about in your post? " Aren't you a self styled academic who prides yourself on doing your own research? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. And How about in your post? Aren't you a self styled academic who prides yourself on doing your own research? "So that's a no then.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Brexiters seem to think loss of UK jobs, UK tax revenue etc is no major issue. Speaks alot about their competence and lack of concern. " Or they think that it is: (a) a price worth paying; (b) the savings from not being in the EU will offset it; (c) the downsides are being exaggerated wildly by remoaners. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Brexiters seem to think loss of UK jobs, UK tax revenue etc is no major issue. Speaks alot about their competence and lack of concern. " That's because Brexiters are able to look at things in context (unlike remainers) and look at the overall jobs figures which show there are now more people currently employed in the UK than at any point since records began in 1971 and that unemployment is at its lowest level since 1975. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. And How about in your post? Aren't you a self styled academic who prides yourself on doing your own research?
So that's a no then. "So you admit you didn't do any of your own research on this and you didn't check the ONS website? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. And How about in your post? Aren't you a self styled academic who prides yourself on doing your own research?
So that's a no then.
So you admit you didn't do any of your own research on this and you didn't check the ONS website? "We are talking about YOUR post. No, you didn't put any percentages. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. And How about in your post? Aren't you a self styled academic who prides yourself on doing your own research?
So that's a no then.
So you admit you didn't do any of your own research on this and you didn't check the ONS website?
We are talking about YOUR post. No, you didn't put any percentages. "But just for you Centaur. The unemployment rate is 4.2% Which is better than under Thatcher in 1984 when they were 11.9%. Or under Major (1993) when the rate was 10.6%. Or under Cameron when it was 8.5% (2011). But worse than under Heath in 1973 where it was 3.4% and records started at 3.8% in 1971. So do you admit that you were wrong and that the unemployment rate is not the lowest since records began? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. " Yes, they are, but the superior intellectual being that is CLCC is being purposefully obtuse. Apart from anything, it was all over the media, and they can easily google it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. Yes, they are, but the superior intellectual being that is CLCC is being purposefully obtuse. Apart from anything, it was all over the media, and they can easily google it." See above, Centaur has been proven wrong. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. " Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. Yes, they are, but the superior intellectual being that is CLCC is being purposefully obtuse. Apart from anything, it was all over the media, and they can easily google it." I think CLCC has quite a bit of difficulty using Google. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. Yes, they are, but the superior intellectual being that is CLCC is being purposefully obtuse. Apart from anything, it was all over the media, and they can easily google it. I think CLCC has quite a bit of difficulty using Google. "You're just gonna ignore my post proving you wrong then? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit." or because trends are a better indicator than a spot measurement. Or was the pre brexit increase due to an anticipation of brexit ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. And How about in your post? Aren't you a self styled academic who prides yourself on doing your own research?
So that's a no then.
So you admit you didn't do any of your own research on this and you didn't check the ONS website?
We are talking about YOUR post. No, you didn't put any percentages.
But just for you Centaur. The unemployment rate is 4.2%
Which is better than under Thatcher in 1984 when they were 11.9%. Or under Major (1993) when the rate was 10.6%. Or under Cameron when it was 8.5% (2011).
But worse than under Heath in 1973 where it was 3.4% and records started at 3.8% in 1971.
So do you admit that you were wrong and that the unemployment rate is not the lowest since records began? "So you're saying in 1971 before we joined the common market (EU) the employment figures were better. Then after we joined the Common market (EU) in 1973 the employment figures got worse under Thatcher, Major and Cameron. Then when the country voted Leave in 2016 the overall employment figures improved again. Anyone notice a pattern developing here? I think CLCC has just proved that being in the EU is shit for employment rates, but you only have to look at the current high unemployment levels in Southern Europe, Spain, Greece, Italy etc to understand that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit." Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"But it is to do with Brexit. Farmers have already complained about the loss of foreign migrant workers, who are already no longer coming here, as a result of Brexit. Those jobs now have to be done by UK nationals, so that directly reduced the number of unemployed. And you will never get unemployment under 1 million. That is the baseline figure for the can't work/won't work types." It's more likely that temporary jobs are being created in the manufacturing and service sectors where people are buying goods as the pound is low, or where companies know they are subject to huge fluctuations in demand. Where did you hear that those piece work jobs are being filled by hundreds of enthusiastic Brits then? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well the farmers have stopped complaining, and the local greengrocers and my fridges have plenty of English produce in them, so someone must be picking it." apart from an article in the guardian. Today. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well the farmers have stopped complaining, and the local greengrocers and my fridges have plenty of English produce in them, so someone must be picking it.apart from an article in the guardian. Today. " Guardian! So that won't have a Blairite, left-wing, politically correct, pro-immigration, pro-EU slant on it at all, will it...... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? " Apart from the fact that, by now, according to the remain campaign there should be 1.1 to 1.4 Million fewer people in employment than there are; and we should be in the middle of a 'deep and profound recession'. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Well the farmers have stopped complaining, and the local greengrocers and my fridges have plenty of English produce in them, so someone must be picking it.apart from an article in the guardian. Today. Guardian! So that won't have a Blairite, left-wing, politically correct, pro-immigration, pro-EU slant on it at all, will it......" and a pro brexit paper would be lining up to push such a story ? Agendas work both ways. I was just pointing out the bad timing. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? Apart from the fact that, by now, according to the remain campaign there should be 1.1 to 1.4 Million fewer people in employment than there are; and we should be in the middle of a 'deep and profound recession'." what was the pro brexit prediction ? I genuinely struggle to find anything outside a Minford paper. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. And How about in your post? Aren't you a self styled academic who prides yourself on doing your own research?
So that's a no then.
So you admit you didn't do any of your own research on this and you didn't check the ONS website?
We are talking about YOUR post. No, you didn't put any percentages.
But just for you Centaur. The unemployment rate is 4.2%
Which is better than under Thatcher in 1984 when they were 11.9%. Or under Major (1993) when the rate was 10.6%. Or under Cameron when it was 8.5% (2011).
But worse than under Heath in 1973 where it was 3.4% and records started at 3.8% in 1971.
So do you admit that you were wrong and that the unemployment rate is not the lowest since records began?
So you're saying in 1971 before we joined the common market (EU) the employment figures were better. Then after we joined the Common market (EU) in 1973 the employment figures got worse under Thatcher, Major and Cameron. Then when the country voted Leave in 2016 the overall employment figures improved again. Anyone notice a pattern developing here?
I think CLCC has just proved that being in the EU is shit for employment rates, but you only have to look at the current high unemployment levels in Southern Europe, Spain, Greece, Italy etc to understand that. "Do you admit that you were wrong and that the unemployment rate is not the lowest since records began? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. And How about in your post? Aren't you a self styled academic who prides yourself on doing your own research?
So that's a no then.
So you admit you didn't do any of your own research on this and you didn't check the ONS website?
We are talking about YOUR post. No, you didn't put any percentages.
But just for you Centaur. The unemployment rate is 4.2%
Which is better than under Thatcher in 1984 when they were 11.9%. Or under Major (1993) when the rate was 10.6%. Or under Cameron when it was 8.5% (2011).
But worse than under Heath in 1973 where it was 3.4% and records started at 3.8% in 1971.
So do you admit that you were wrong and that the unemployment rate is not the lowest since records began?
So you're saying in 1971 before we joined the common market (EU) the employment figures were better. Then after we joined the Common market (EU) in 1973 the employment figures got worse under Thatcher, Major and Cameron. Then when the country voted Leave in 2016 the overall employment figures improved again. Anyone notice a pattern developing here?
I think CLCC has just proved that being in the EU is shit for employment rates, but you only have to look at the current high unemployment levels in Southern Europe, Spain, Greece, Italy etc to understand that.
Do you admit that you were wrong and that the unemployment rate is not the lowest since records began? "If you're saying that being in the EU is shit for employment rates as the figures you posted seem to suggest, then yes I agree with you. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Plus staff salaries, income tax, NI contributions, them spending their salaries in the UK etc. Which is why the latest overall jobs figures which I posted from the ONS is relevant to the thread, even though the OP tried to say it was a diversion. All those extra jobs overall which the ONS figures show more people are paying income tax, NI contributions and those people spending their salaries in the UK than ever before since records began in 1971. Is the population bigger than 1971? That's why they show the figures comparatively as a percentage. Nope, they are in absolute numbers, not percentages. Did you struggle to read Centaur's post? Pretty sure they are listed as a percentage on the ONS website. And How about in your post? Aren't you a self styled academic who prides yourself on doing your own research?
So that's a no then.
So you admit you didn't do any of your own research on this and you didn't check the ONS website?
We are talking about YOUR post. No, you didn't put any percentages.
But just for you Centaur. The unemployment rate is 4.2%
Which is better than under Thatcher in 1984 when they were 11.9%. Or under Major (1993) when the rate was 10.6%. Or under Cameron when it was 8.5% (2011).
But worse than under Heath in 1973 where it was 3.4% and records started at 3.8% in 1971.
So do you admit that you were wrong and that the unemployment rate is not the lowest since records began?
So you're saying in 1971 before we joined the common market (EU) the employment figures were better. Then after we joined the Common market (EU) in 1973 the employment figures got worse under Thatcher, Major and Cameron. Then when the country voted Leave in 2016 the overall employment figures improved again. Anyone notice a pattern developing here?
I think CLCC has just proved that being in the EU is shit for employment rates, but you only have to look at the current high unemployment levels in Southern Europe, Spain, Greece, Italy etc to understand that.
Do you admit that you were wrong and that the unemployment rate is not the lowest since records began?
If you're saying that being in the EU is shit for employment rates as the figures you posted seem to suggest, then yes I agree with you. "Glad to see you admit you were wrong. You are also wrong to assume that it's the EU to blame, it seems to be Tory governments from Thatcher onwards that is bad for employment rates. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? Apart from the fact that, by now, according to the remain campaign there should be 1.1 to 1.4 Million fewer people in employment than there are; and we should be in the middle of a 'deep and profound recession'." Hey, can't get it right every time. Just a reminder tho; 350 million on a bus; signing trade deals the day after the vote; no one said we'd leave the single market; we'll curb immigration; We'll take back our fisheries..... and that's all I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are other predictions Leave got wrong, perhaps anyone else can help? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? Apart from the fact that, by now, according to the remain campaign there should be 1.1 to 1.4 Million fewer people in employment than there are; and we should be in the middle of a 'deep and profound recession'. Hey, can't get it right every time. Just a reminder tho; 350 million on a bus; signing trade deals the day after the vote; no one said we'd leave the single market; we'll curb immigration; We'll take back our fisheries..... and that's all I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are other predictions Leave got wrong, perhaps anyone else can help? " No one said we'd leave the single market???? Are you joking? All the main players on both sides of the referendum campaign both Leavers and Remainers said a vote to leave meant leaving the single market. Most notably on the remain side the then Prime minister David Cameron said it and the then chancellor George Osborne. On the Leave side most notably Michael Gove said it, and when Boris Johnson was asked he said he agreed with Michael Gove. As for immigration it's already started dropping since the vote to leave according to figures from the Home office and the ONS. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? Apart from the fact that, by now, according to the remain campaign there should be 1.1 to 1.4 Million fewer people in employment than there are; and we should be in the middle of a 'deep and profound recession'. Hey, can't get it right every time. Just a reminder tho; 350 million on a bus; signing trade deals the day after the vote; no one said we'd leave the single market; we'll curb immigration; We'll take back our fisheries..... and that's all I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are other predictions Leave got wrong, perhaps anyone else can help? No one said we'd leave the single market???? Are you joking? All the main players on both sides of the referendum campaign both Leavers and Remainers said a vote to leave meant leaving the single market. Most notably on the remain side the then Prime minister David Cameron said it and the then chancellor George Osborne. On the Leave side most notably Michael Gove said it, and when Boris Johnson was asked he said he agreed with Michael Gove. As for immigration it's already started dropping since the vote to leave according to figures from the Home office and the ONS. " There's a clip of some Tory leave minister saying "No one said we'd have to leave the single market" in an interview. I can't be arsed looking now for the link. But it's quite famous and often trotted out when you forget that your message was sometimes muddled. And Immigration will fall as EU citizens get the fuck out of Dodge. And then India will pick up the slack as they want visa free travel for a trade deal. Ditto Turkey. Probably a few more also. So it's not going to drop very far. Certainly to the unrealistic numbers Leavers want. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? Apart from the fact that, by now, according to the remain campaign there should be 1.1 to 1.4 Million fewer people in employment than there are; and we should be in the middle of a 'deep and profound recession'. Hey, can't get it right every time. Just a reminder tho; 350 million on a bus; signing trade deals the day after the vote; no one said we'd leave the single market; we'll curb immigration; We'll take back our fisheries..... and that's all I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are other predictions Leave got wrong, perhaps anyone else can help? No one said we'd leave the single market???? Are you joking? All the main players on both sides of the referendum campaign both Leavers and Remainers said a vote to leave meant leaving the single market. Most notably on the remain side the then Prime minister David Cameron said it and the then chancellor George Osborne. On the Leave side most notably Michael Gove said it, and when Boris Johnson was asked he said he agreed with Michael Gove. As for immigration it's already started dropping since the vote to leave according to figures from the Home office and the ONS. " Pal, do you want me to link where Daniel Hannan - probably the political brains behind leave, said repeatedly in open public debate(s) that we could go for a Norway or Swiss model. The listing of option implies there would be options. Or does hannan not count as he's an MEP not a MP or minster? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"https://youtu.be/0xGt3QmRSZY Well worth another watch! " As is this! https://youtu.be/Z4Jb-fmFfiU | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"https://youtu.be/0xGt3QmRSZY Well worth another watch! " As is this! https://youtu.be/Z4Jb-fmFfiU | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? Apart from the fact that, by now, according to the remain campaign there should be 1.1 to 1.4 Million fewer people in employment than there are; and we should be in the middle of a 'deep and profound recession'. Hey, can't get it right every time. Just a reminder tho; 350 million on a bus; signing trade deals the day after the vote; no one said we'd leave the single market; we'll curb immigration; We'll take back our fisheries..... and that's all I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are other predictions Leave got wrong, perhaps anyone else can help? No one said we'd leave the single market???? Are you joking? All the main players on both sides of the referendum campaign both Leavers and Remainers said a vote to leave meant leaving the single market. Most notably on the remain side the then Prime minister David Cameron said it and the then chancellor George Osborne. On the Leave side most notably Michael Gove said it, and when Boris Johnson was asked he said he agreed with Michael Gove. As for immigration it's already started dropping since the vote to leave according to figures from the Home office and the ONS. Pal, do you want me to link where Daniel Hannan - probably the political brains behind leave, said repeatedly in open public debate(s) that we could go for a Norway or Swiss model. The listing of option implies there would be options. Or does hannan not count as he's an MEP not a MP or minster?" That's the chap! Sorry, was tired. Arguing with Gammon and trying to work at a job that might not exist next year because of Brexit really takes it out of you. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" As for immigration it's already started dropping since the vote to leave according to figures from the Home office and the ONS. " brextremist racist gammon will be pleased then  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"https://youtu.be/0xGt3QmRSZY Well worth another watch! As is this! https://youtu.be/Z4Jb-fmFfiU" Why? It doesn't make the statements any less true does it? They made those statements, then lied about it, just like the poster above. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? Apart from the fact that, by now, according to the remain campaign there should be 1.1 to 1.4 Million fewer people in employment than there are; and we should be in the middle of a 'deep and profound recession'. Hey, can't get it right every time. Just a reminder tho; 350 million on a bus; signing trade deals the day after the vote; no one said we'd leave the single market; we'll curb immigration; We'll take back our fisheries..... and that's all I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are other predictions Leave got wrong, perhaps anyone else can help? No one said we'd leave the single market???? Are you joking? All the main players on both sides of the referendum campaign both Leavers and Remainers said a vote to leave meant leaving the single market. Most notably on the remain side the then Prime minister David Cameron said it and the then chancellor George Osborne. On the Leave side most notably Michael Gove said it, and when Boris Johnson was asked he said he agreed with Michael Gove. As for immigration it's already started dropping since the vote to leave according to figures from the Home office and the ONS. Pal, do you want me to link where Daniel Hannan - probably the political brains behind leave, said repeatedly in open public debate(s) that we could go for a Norway or Swiss model. The listing of option implies there would be options. Or does hannan not count as he's an MEP not a MP or minster? That's the chap! Sorry, was tired. Arguing with Gammon and trying to work at a job that might not exist next year because of Brexit really takes it out of you. "And in case anyone's keeping track of the lies, the same man today tweeted that the EU has imposed a 114% duty on banana imports. When they haven't. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. " That's funny, as wether there is any duty at all depends where they are from. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? Apart from the fact that, by now, according to the remain campaign there should be 1.1 to 1.4 Million fewer people in employment than there are; and we should be in the middle of a 'deep and profound recession'. Hey, can't get it right every time. Just a reminder tho; 350 million on a bus; signing trade deals the day after the vote; no one said we'd leave the single market; we'll curb immigration; We'll take back our fisheries..... and that's all I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are other predictions Leave got wrong, perhaps anyone else can help? No one said we'd leave the single market???? Are you joking? All the main players on both sides of the referendum campaign both Leavers and Remainers said a vote to leave meant leaving the single market. Most notably on the remain side the then Prime minister David Cameron said it and the then chancellor George Osborne. On the Leave side most notably Michael Gove said it, and when Boris Johnson was asked he said he agreed with Michael Gove. As for immigration it's already started dropping since the vote to leave according to figures from the Home office and the ONS. Pal, do you want me to link where Daniel Hannan - probably the political brains behind leave, said repeatedly in open public debate(s) that we could go for a Norway or Swiss model. The listing of option implies there would be options. Or does hannan not count as he's an MEP not a MP or minster? That's the chap! Sorry, was tired. Arguing with Gammon and trying to work at a job that might not exist next year because of Brexit really takes it out of you. "Well you've got a year to find another job then, haven't you? Or maybe that's not long enough for you. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? Apart from the fact that, by now, according to the remain campaign there should be 1.1 to 1.4 Million fewer people in employment than there are; and we should be in the middle of a 'deep and profound recession'. Hey, can't get it right every time. Just a reminder tho; 350 million on a bus; signing trade deals the day after the vote; no one said we'd leave the single market; we'll curb immigration; We'll take back our fisheries..... and that's all I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are other predictions Leave got wrong, perhaps anyone else can help? No one said we'd leave the single market???? Are you joking? All the main players on both sides of the referendum campaign both Leavers and Remainers said a vote to leave meant leaving the single market. Most notably on the remain side the then Prime minister David Cameron said it and the then chancellor George Osborne. On the Leave side most notably Michael Gove said it, and when Boris Johnson was asked he said he agreed with Michael Gove. As for immigration it's already started dropping since the vote to leave according to figures from the Home office and the ONS. Pal, do you want me to link where Daniel Hannan - probably the political brains behind leave, said repeatedly in open public debate(s) that we could go for a Norway or Swiss model. The listing of option implies there would be options. Or does hannan not count as he's an MEP not a MP or minster? That's the chap! Sorry, was tired. Arguing with Gammon and trying to work at a job that might not exist next year because of Brexit really takes it out of you.
Well you've got a year to find another job then, haven't you? Or maybe that's not long enough for you."Employment usually finds me thanks. But why should I have to look just because half the country is hard of thinking? And being from Derby, you can witness first hand what happens when the area's major employers have to start laying people off, temporarily or otherwise. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. " Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oh dear... The slippery slope has began for real now." It will all be fine get a grip | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume. "And why do you think that he did that? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Oh dear... The slippery slope has began for real now.It will all be fine get a grip" Yes of course it will. And the NHS will get £350 million a week and we'll find the gold at the end of the rainbow and...and...
Oh look! A unicorn!  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? Apart from the fact that, by now, according to the remain campaign there should be 1.1 to 1.4 Million fewer people in employment than there are; and we should be in the middle of a 'deep and profound recession'. Hey, can't get it right every time. Just a reminder tho; 350 million on a bus; signing trade deals the day after the vote; no one said we'd leave the single market; we'll curb immigration; We'll take back our fisheries..... and that's all I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are other predictions Leave got wrong, perhaps anyone else can help? No one said we'd leave the single market???? Are you joking? All the main players on both sides of the referendum campaign both Leavers and Remainers said a vote to leave meant leaving the single market. Most notably on the remain side the then Prime minister David Cameron said it and the then chancellor George Osborne. On the Leave side most notably Michael Gove said it, and when Boris Johnson was asked he said he agreed with Michael Gove. As for immigration it's already started dropping since the vote to leave according to figures from the Home office and the ONS. Pal, do you want me to link where Daniel Hannan - probably the political brains behind leave, said repeatedly in open public debate(s) that we could go for a Norway or Swiss model. The listing of option implies there would be options. Or does hannan not count as he's an MEP not a MP or minster? That's the chap! Sorry, was tired. Arguing with Gammon and trying to work at a job that might not exist next year because of Brexit really takes it out of you.
Well you've got a year to find another job then, haven't you? Or maybe that's not long enough for you.
Employment usually finds me thanks. But why should I have to look just because half the country is hard of thinking?
And being from Derby, you can witness first hand what happens when the area's major employers have to start laying people off, temporarily or otherwise.
"You don't have to look, remember? And not half the country is hard of thinking - 48% is less than half. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Been looking at the figures on the spreadsheet and employment has been rising steadily for the two years before the referendum. So crowing about it either way is probably wrong. Probably entirely unrelated to Brexit. At the moment anyway. Yes, because any bad news is because of brexit, and any good news has nothing to do with brexit. Not in this case no. It appears that the employment figures have been growing steadily for years. Some years more than others, but not by a huge margin. Happily this is one of those things that has just happened. Nothing to do with Brexit, nothing to do with staying in the EU. Sorry if that seems like bad news that you can't credit it to Brexit. But after we leave, if there's a massive jump from all the trade deals we are going to sign immediately, you can take credit for that. Ditto if there's a big fall. Deal? Apart from the fact that, by now, according to the remain campaign there should be 1.1 to 1.4 Million fewer people in employment than there are; and we should be in the middle of a 'deep and profound recession'. Hey, can't get it right every time. Just a reminder tho; 350 million on a bus; signing trade deals the day after the vote; no one said we'd leave the single market; we'll curb immigration; We'll take back our fisheries..... and that's all I can think of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are other predictions Leave got wrong, perhaps anyone else can help? No one said we'd leave the single market???? Are you joking? All the main players on both sides of the referendum campaign both Leavers and Remainers said a vote to leave meant leaving the single market. Most notably on the remain side the then Prime minister David Cameron said it and the then chancellor George Osborne. On the Leave side most notably Michael Gove said it, and when Boris Johnson was asked he said he agreed with Michael Gove. As for immigration it's already started dropping since the vote to leave according to figures from the Home office and the ONS. Pal, do you want me to link where Daniel Hannan - probably the political brains behind leave, said repeatedly in open public debate(s) that we could go for a Norway or Swiss model. The listing of option implies there would be options. Or does hannan not count as he's an MEP not a MP or minster? That's the chap! Sorry, was tired. Arguing with Gammon and trying to work at a job that might not exist next year because of Brexit really takes it out of you.
Well you've got a year to find another job then, haven't you? Or maybe that's not long enough for you.
Employment usually finds me thanks. But why should I have to look just because half the country is hard of thinking?
And being from Derby, you can witness first hand what happens when the area's major employers have to start laying people off, temporarily or otherwise.
"You mean job cuts like these from 2011? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-14098564 "The government has said that the Siemens bid represents the best value for money, and that it was following EU procurement rules, which do not allow where companies are based to be taken into account." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?"Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit. "And that's your best guess? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because we don’t have the bandwidth to renegotiate with them. Even though this was said to be easy. " I don't think you understand the point. It's not about negotiation at all! Bananas have a world price. That's how commodities are traded. The point is this - the EU imposes an import tax on bananas. That is nothing to do with negotiation. It's just a tax level. No different from the rates that the Chancellor sets for VAT, income tax or on cigarettes and beer. Once we leave the EU, we can set any level of import duty that we like on bananas. It has nothing to do with negotiation or power. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?"Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas."When did I say that it was ridiculous? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Doesn’t the A in FTA stand for agreement ? To me this suggests negotiation. Given it is simply a tax I’m at a loss why he doesn’t just set them to zero. After all we can change VAT quickly ...." Think about why he hasn't said that at the moment. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas.
When did I say that it was ridiculous?"Why do you think it's unjustified for the EU to charge a tariff on bananas, but justified for the UK to do so? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas.
When did I say that it was ridiculous?
Why do you think it's unjustified for the EU to charge a tariff on bananas, but justified for the UK to do so? "Where have I said that I think it is justified for either to do so? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Doesn’t the A in FTA stand for agreement ? To me this suggests negotiation. Given it is simply a tax I’m at a loss why he doesn’t just set them to zero. After all we can change VAT quickly .... Think about why he hasn't said that at the moment." said what ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Doesn’t the A in FTA stand for agreement ? To me this suggests negotiation. Given it is simply a tax I’m at a loss why he doesn’t just set them to zero. After all we can change VAT quickly .... Think about why he hasn't said that at the moment.said what ? " Liam Fox has not said at the moment that post Brexit, the UK import duty will differ from that which is imposed by the EU. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Doesn’t the A in FTA stand for agreement ? To me this suggests negotiation. Given it is simply a tax I’m at a loss why he doesn’t just set them to zero. After all we can change VAT quickly .... Think about why he hasn't said that at the moment.said what ? Liam Fox has not said at the moment that post Brexit, the UK import duty will differ from that which is imposed by the EU." I’m at a loss of what you’re arguing here. If I play back where I think the discussion is Liam Fox has said we will adopt the EU position post brexit (for the short term at least) because of capacity issues. You say the tariffs are not something which are negotiated. More like vat Tax can be changed quickly. So there is no reason why the tariffs can’t be changed quickly. Therefore we are making an active decision to keep the tax. Making us as bad as the Eu. Now I may have misrepresented a point here, as half the posts are questions, not your own position. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Tbh I’m not convinced by your position trade agreements are analogous to taxes. But if we follow your position can you explain (without asking a question) why his strategy is clever ? Especially as this is noting to do with negotiation or power, so I’m not seeing why any strategy is needed " They are not! The chancellor can say that duty on cigarettes is £500 a packet. He can just do that at the next budget. He cannot just go to Central America and say - let's agree a trade deal, and as part of that trade deal, we will pay £1 for tonne for tobacco. That needs to negotiated and it is up to the Central American country to say yes or no. It is out of our hands. Tobacco duty is absolutely in our hands. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas.
When did I say that it was ridiculous?
Why do you think it's unjustified for the EU to charge a tariff on bananas, but justified for the UK to do so?
Where have I said that I think it is justified for either to do so?"
Do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The UK is the 5th largest economy in the world. We absolutely do have the bandwidth!" not sure the two are linked. But I’m just basing my view on what Fox has said. Fox said. “It requires the willingness of the country involved to want to move the process further on and it’s dependent on our own capacity in our own department.” | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The UK is the 5th largest economy in the world. We absolutely do have the bandwidth!not sure the two are linked. But I’m just basing my view on what Fox has said. Fox said. “It requires the willingness of the country involved to want to move the process further on and it’s dependent on our own capacity in our own department.”" So he basically said nothing. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas.
When did I say that it was ridiculous?
Why do you think it's unjustified for the EU to charge a tariff on bananas, but justified for the UK to do so?
Where have I said that I think it is justified for either to do so?
Do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
I think that he should keep his powder dry on that one, which is exactly what he is doing. His strategy is clever.
"Why do you think it's clever to charge a tariff on bananas? You think it is unjustified for the EU to charge tariffs on bananas, but by saying you think it's "clever" indicates that you think it is justified for the UK to charge a tariff on bananas. (Despite questioning this above for no other reason than to be obtuse) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas.
When did I say that it was ridiculous?
Why do you think it's unjustified for the EU to charge a tariff on bananas, but justified for the UK to do so?
Where have I said that I think it is justified for either to do so?
Do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
I think that he should keep his powder dry on that one, which is exactly what he is doing. His strategy is clever.
Why do you think it's clever to charge a tariff on bananas? You think it is unjustified for the EU to charge tariffs on bananas, but by saying you think it's "clever" indicates that you think it is justified for the UK to charge a tariff on bananas. (Despite questioning this above for no other reason than to be obtuse)"I didn't say it was clever or not. I said it was clever to keep his powder dry on the point, because it is. Have you ever bought a house or a business for instance in your life? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas.
When did I say that it was ridiculous?
Why do you think it's unjustified for the EU to charge a tariff on bananas, but justified for the UK to do so?
Where have I said that I think it is justified for either to do so?
Do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
I think that he should keep his powder dry on that one, which is exactly what he is doing. His strategy is clever.
Why do you think it's clever to charge a tariff on bananas? You think it is unjustified for the EU to charge tariffs on bananas, but by saying you think it's "clever" indicates that you think it is justified for the UK to charge a tariff on bananas. (Despite questioning this above for no other reason than to be obtuse)
I didn't say it was clever or not. I said it was clever to keep his powder dry on the point, because it is.
Have you ever bought a house or a business for instance in your life?"So answer the question then, do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas? WTO schedules require unanimous support from every member of the WTO. It's ridiculous to suggest that they will agree to our schedule and then allow us to change it a few months or even years later just for bananas. We get one shot at this. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas.
When did I say that it was ridiculous?
Why do you think it's unjustified for the EU to charge a tariff on bananas, but justified for the UK to do so?
Where have I said that I think it is justified for either to do so?
Do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
I think that he should keep his powder dry on that one, which is exactly what he is doing. His strategy is clever.
Why do you think it's clever to charge a tariff on bananas? You think it is unjustified for the EU to charge tariffs on bananas, but by saying you think it's "clever" indicates that you think it is justified for the UK to charge a tariff on bananas. (Despite questioning this above for no other reason than to be obtuse)
I didn't say it was clever or not. I said it was clever to keep his powder dry on the point, because it is.
Have you ever bought a house or a business for instance in your life?
So answer the question then, do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
WTO schedules require unanimous support from every member of the WTO. It's ridiculous to suggest that they will agree to our schedule and then allow us to change it a few months or even years later just for bananas. We get one shot at this."So every member of the world in the WTO charges exactly the same import duty on bananas? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas.
When did I say that it was ridiculous?
Why do you think it's unjustified for the EU to charge a tariff on bananas, but justified for the UK to do so?
Where have I said that I think it is justified for either to do so?
Do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
I think that he should keep his powder dry on that one, which is exactly what he is doing. His strategy is clever.
Why do you think it's clever to charge a tariff on bananas? You think it is unjustified for the EU to charge tariffs on bananas, but by saying you think it's "clever" indicates that you think it is justified for the UK to charge a tariff on bananas. (Despite questioning this above for no other reason than to be obtuse)
I didn't say it was clever or not. I said it was clever to keep his powder dry on the point, because it is.
Have you ever bought a house or a business for instance in your life?
So answer the question then, do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
WTO schedules require unanimous support from every member of the WTO. It's ridiculous to suggest that they will agree to our schedule and then allow us to change it a few months or even years later just for bananas. We get one shot at this.
So every member of the world in the WTO charges exactly the same import duty on bananas?
"No, you are obviously ignorant of how tariff schedules work. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas.
When did I say that it was ridiculous?
Why do you think it's unjustified for the EU to charge a tariff on bananas, but justified for the UK to do so?
Where have I said that I think it is justified for either to do so?
Do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
I think that he should keep his powder dry on that one, which is exactly what he is doing. His strategy is clever.
Why do you think it's clever to charge a tariff on bananas? You think it is unjustified for the EU to charge tariffs on bananas, but by saying you think it's "clever" indicates that you think it is justified for the UK to charge a tariff on bananas. (Despite questioning this above for no other reason than to be obtuse)
I didn't say it was clever or not. I said it was clever to keep his powder dry on the point, because it is.
Have you ever bought a house or a business for instance in your life?
So answer the question then, do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
WTO schedules require unanimous support from every member of the WTO. It's ridiculous to suggest that they will agree to our schedule and then allow us to change it a few months or even years later just for bananas. We get one shot at this.
So every member of the world in the WTO charges exactly the same import duty on bananas?
No, you are obviously ignorant of how tariff schedules work. "No I understand full well. Either you are saying that we are free to set our own, or you are saying that we can only set them identically to every other member of the WTO. Which is it? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas.
When did I say that it was ridiculous?
Why do you think it's unjustified for the EU to charge a tariff on bananas, but justified for the UK to do so?
Where have I said that I think it is justified for either to do so?
Do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
I think that he should keep his powder dry on that one, which is exactly what he is doing. His strategy is clever.
Why do you think it's clever to charge a tariff on bananas? You think it is unjustified for the EU to charge tariffs on bananas, but by saying you think it's "clever" indicates that you think it is justified for the UK to charge a tariff on bananas. (Despite questioning this above for no other reason than to be obtuse)
I didn't say it was clever or not. I said it was clever to keep his powder dry on the point, because it is.
Have you ever bought a house or a business for instance in your life?
So answer the question then, do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
WTO schedules require unanimous support from every member of the WTO. It's ridiculous to suggest that they will agree to our schedule and then allow us to change it a few months or even years later just for bananas. We get one shot at this.
So every member of the world in the WTO charges exactly the same import duty on bananas?
No, you are obviously ignorant of how tariff schedules work.
No I understand full well.
Either you are saying that we are free to set our own, or you are saying that we can only set them identically to every other member of the WTO.
Which is it?"You don't know how it works if you are asking that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas.
When did I say that it was ridiculous?
Why do you think it's unjustified for the EU to charge a tariff on bananas, but justified for the UK to do so?
Where have I said that I think it is justified for either to do so?
Do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
I think that he should keep his powder dry on that one, which is exactly what he is doing. His strategy is clever.
Why do you think it's clever to charge a tariff on bananas? You think it is unjustified for the EU to charge tariffs on bananas, but by saying you think it's "clever" indicates that you think it is justified for the UK to charge a tariff on bananas. (Despite questioning this above for no other reason than to be obtuse)
I didn't say it was clever or not. I said it was clever to keep his powder dry on the point, because it is.
Have you ever bought a house or a business for instance in your life?
So answer the question then, do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
WTO schedules require unanimous support from every member of the WTO. It's ridiculous to suggest that they will agree to our schedule and then allow us to change it a few months or even years later just for bananas. We get one shot at this.
So every member of the world in the WTO charges exactly the same import duty on bananas?
No, you are obviously ignorant of how tariff schedules work.
No I understand full well.
Either you are saying that we are free to set our own, or you are saying that we can only set them identically to every other member of the WTO.
Which is it?
You don't know how it works if you are asking that. "I do. I am asking you, because you appear to be blaming Fox on the one hand, and saying that his hands are tied on the other! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Why should the EU tax bananas at all? It's not like we are protecting the domestic market is it? The duty is 145 euros per tonne, reducing to 75 euros in 2 years time. Bananas trade at about 1000 euros a tonne on the commodity markets so at present there is a 14.5% tax on the commodity price. That is unjustified. Were you aware that Liam Fox has copied this schedule of tariffs lock stock and barrel for our WTO schedules, and so the UK will continue to change a tariff on bananas even after we leave the EU? To protect domestic banana producers I assume.
And why do you think that he did that?
Because all this talk of going it alone, making our own deal etc. Is bullshit.
And that's your best guess?
Why don't you tell me why you think it's ridiculous for the EU to have tariffs on bananas, but perfectly reasonable for the UK to have tariffs on bananas.
When did I say that it was ridiculous?
Why do you think it's unjustified for the EU to charge a tariff on bananas, but justified for the UK to do so?
Where have I said that I think it is justified for either to do so?
Do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
I think that he should keep his powder dry on that one, which is exactly what he is doing. His strategy is clever.
Why do you think it's clever to charge a tariff on bananas? You think it is unjustified for the EU to charge tariffs on bananas, but by saying you think it's "clever" indicates that you think it is justified for the UK to charge a tariff on bananas. (Despite questioning this above for no other reason than to be obtuse)
I didn't say it was clever or not. I said it was clever to keep his powder dry on the point, because it is.
Have you ever bought a house or a business for instance in your life?
So answer the question then, do you think Fox should charge a tariff on bananas?
WTO schedules require unanimous support from every member of the WTO. It's ridiculous to suggest that they will agree to our schedule and then allow us to change it a few months or even years later just for bananas. We get one shot at this.
So every member of the world in the WTO charges exactly the same import duty on bananas?
No, you are obviously ignorant of how tariff schedules work.
No I understand full well.
Either you are saying that we are free to set our own, or you are saying that we can only set them identically to every other member of the WTO.
Which is it?
You don't know how it works if you are asking that.
I do. I am asking you, because you appear to be blaming Fox on the one hand, and saying that his hands are tied on the other!"Right, so you know that the UK tells the WTO what their specific tariffs will be (they don't have to match anyone elses), and then the rest of the WTO members (virtually every country in the world) have to agree to this schedule. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because we don’t have the bandwidth to renegotiate with them. Even though this was said to be easy. I don't think you understand the point. It's not about negotiation at all! Bananas have a world price. That's how commodities are traded. The point is this - the EU imposes an import tax on bananas. That is nothing to do with negotiation. It's just a tax level. No different from the rates that the Chancellor sets for VAT, income tax or on cigarettes and beer. Once we leave the EU, we can set any level of import duty that we like on bananas. It has nothing to do with negotiation or power." And the WTO ruled the EU tariff on south american bananas illegal....but the EU chose to ignore the WTO's ruling. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Because we don’t have the bandwidth to renegotiate with them. Even though this was said to be easy. I don't think you understand the point. It's not about negotiation at all! Bananas have a world price. That's how commodities are traded. The point is this - the EU imposes an import tax on bananas. That is nothing to do with negotiation. It's just a tax level. No different from the rates that the Chancellor sets for VAT, income tax or on cigarettes and beer. Once we leave the EU, we can set any level of import duty that we like on bananas. It has nothing to do with negotiation or power. And the WTO ruled the EU tariff on south american bananas illegal....but the EU chose to ignore the WTO's ruling." That kind of makes Brexiters who pin their hopes on the WTO to protect British trade as morons then, doesn't it? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Yes, like those. But with all of them at once, when the supply chains for parts start experiencing *customs difficulties* because there was no preparation for this. For example, HMRC doesn't have a new IT system in place, and possibly won't til 2023. And the history of government IT systems being introduced on time, on budget and actually working is distressing reading. " You mean, like those job cuts, from 2011, caused by the government having to give Siemens a contract, meaning those jobs go elsewhere in the EU, because of EU rules? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Yes, like those. But with all of them at once, when the supply chains for parts start experiencing *customs difficulties* because there was no preparation for this. For example, HMRC doesn't have a new IT system in place, and possibly won't til 2023. And the history of government IT systems being introduced on time, on budget and actually working is distressing reading. You mean, like those job cuts, from 2011, caused by the government having to give Siemens a contract, meaning those jobs go elsewhere in the EU, because of EU rules?" Oh God, don't tell me you are one of those people who think UK companies should be able to bid and win government contracts in other countries, but think that only British companies should be able to bid on British government contracts! You're not one of those are you???? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Yes, like those. But with all of them at once, when the supply chains for parts start experiencing *customs difficulties* because there was no preparation for this. For example, HMRC doesn't have a new IT system in place, and possibly won't til 2023. And the history of government IT systems being introduced on time, on budget and actually working is distressing reading. You mean, like those job cuts, from 2011, caused by the government having to give Siemens a contract, meaning those jobs go elsewhere in the EU, because of EU rules? Oh God, don't tell me you are one of those people who think UK companies should be able to bid and win government contracts in other countries, but think that only British companies should be able to bid on British government contracts! You're not one of those are you???? "No, I'm not. I am, however, one of the 17.5 Million people who think our government should be able to make their own decisions as to who we place government contracts with. Especially if it means UK jobs are protected. You obviously don't care about that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Yes, like those. But with all of them at once, when the supply chains for parts start experiencing *customs difficulties* because there was no preparation for this. For example, HMRC doesn't have a new IT system in place, and possibly won't til 2023. And the history of government IT systems being introduced on time, on budget and actually working is distressing reading. You mean, like those job cuts, from 2011, caused by the government having to give Siemens a contract, meaning those jobs go elsewhere in the EU, because of EU rules? Oh God, don't tell me you are one of those people who think UK companies should be able to bid and win government contracts in other countries, but think that only British companies should be able to bid on British government contracts! You're not one of those are you????
No, I'm not. I am, however, one of the 17.5 Million people who think our government should be able to make their own decisions as to who we place government contracts with. Especially if it means UK jobs are protected.
You obviously don't care about that."“make their own decisions as to who we place government contracts with” is just a coded way of saying ‘we don’t want any foreign companies getting U.K. govt contracts’. So you ok if other govts turn around and say the same to us then? What of all those U.K. people employed to service contracts their employer has won with foreign governments? -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Yes, like those. But with all of them at once, when the supply chains for parts start experiencing *customs difficulties* because there was no preparation for this. For example, HMRC doesn't have a new IT system in place, and possibly won't til 2023. And the history of government IT systems being introduced on time, on budget and actually working is distressing reading. You mean, like those job cuts, from 2011, caused by the government having to give Siemens a contract, meaning those jobs go elsewhere in the EU, because of EU rules? Oh God, don't tell me you are one of those people who think UK companies should be able to bid and win government contracts in other countries, but think that only British companies should be able to bid on British government contracts! You're not one of those are you????
No, I'm not. I am, however, one of the 17.5 Million people who think our government should be able to make their own decisions as to who we place government contracts with. Especially if it means UK jobs are protected.
You obviously don't care about that."But you know that's not what is going to happen right? That a key part of FTAs is the ability to bid on government contracts in the other country. You know that right? Come on, you must know that, right? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Yes, like those. But with all of them at once, when the supply chains for parts start experiencing *customs difficulties* because there was no preparation for this. For example, HMRC doesn't have a new IT system in place, and possibly won't til 2023. And the history of government IT systems being introduced on time, on budget and actually working is distressing reading. You mean, like those job cuts, from 2011, caused by the government having to give Siemens a contract, meaning those jobs go elsewhere in the EU, because of EU rules? Oh God, don't tell me you are one of those people who think UK companies should be able to bid and win government contracts in other countries, but think that only British companies should be able to bid on British government contracts! You're not one of those are you????
No, I'm not. I am, however, one of the 17.5 Million people who think our government should be able to make their own decisions as to who we place government contracts with. Especially if it means UK jobs are protected.
You obviously don't care about that."One of the key points of leaving was to trade with the "world" striking our own deals and not being tied to the EU? We can surely agree on this - yes or have I got it wrong? Trade is done under WTO rules or by way of a trade deal between both parties. We are going to replace our EU trade with the rest of the world. One of our 1st deals is going to be America - yes? Ok at the moment we "sell more" to America than that do to us - fact check it. Trump is America first so do you think he is going to allow that to continue? Given that he has just hit China and blown away all the WTO rules? He's reality tv star and thinks he can push his way around the world - so what sort of deal are we going to get - he isn't going to increase trade unless it's in his favour? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Andcthe last few pointscjust goes to prove... Say they're worried about job losses if we brexit, but couldn't give a shit about british jobs if we're in the EU. Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons." Seeing as you didn't have the balls to respond to my last post. I will assume you were completely ignorant of the fact that the FTAs brexiters want to sign all over the world will include the right to bid on UK government contracts. You guys bitch about France or Germany being able to under cut us, yet want to sign FTAs with China and India! You guys make me laugh! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Andcthe last few pointscjust goes to prove... Say they're worried about job losses if we brexit, but couldn't give a shit about british jobs if we're in the EU. Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons. Seeing as you didn't have the balls to respond to my last post. I will assume you were completely ignorant of the fact that the FTAs brexiters want to sign all over the world will include the right to bid on UK government contracts. You guys bitch about France or Germany being able to under cut us, yet want to sign FTAs with China and India! You guys make me laugh!" That's rich coming from you, who has made an artform of never answerimg questions, so much so that you actually had to start a thread asking people to ask you questions and you'd answer them! FYI, I don't mind other countries being able to bid for UK government contracts, but I do want our government to have the sovereignty to be able to let those contracts to our own companies in preference to others if they wish. Which remorons don't. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Andcthe last few pointscjust goes to prove... Say they're worried about job losses if we brexit, but couldn't give a shit about british jobs if we're in the EU. Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons." Except that as your fellow gammon Centaur is fond of posting about, we have the highest employment rate in 40years. From being in the EU. So are you saying there would be full employment were it not for the EU? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Andcthe last few pointscjust goes to prove... Say they're worried about job losses if we brexit, but couldn't give a shit about british jobs if we're in the EU. Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons. Seeing as you didn't have the balls to respond to my last post. I will assume you were completely ignorant of the fact that the FTAs brexiters want to sign all over the world will include the right to bid on UK government contracts. You guys bitch about France or Germany being able to under cut us, yet want to sign FTAs with China and India! You guys make me laugh! That's rich coming from you, who has made an artform of never answerimg questions, so much so that you actually had to start a thread asking people to ask you questions and you'd answer them! FYI, I don't mind other countries being able to bid for UK government contracts, but I do want our government to have the sovereignty to be able to let those contracts to our own companies in preference to others if they wish. Which remorons don't." They won't be able to though. In the same way you won't want British companies to be told that even though they were the best bid, they didn't get the contract because some domestic company got it instead. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Andcthe last few pointscjust goes to prove... Say they're worried about job losses if we brexit, but couldn't give a shit about british jobs if we're in the EU. Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons. Except that as your fellow gammon Centaur is fond of posting about, we have the highest employment rate in 40years. From being in the EU. So are you saying there would be full employment were it not for the EU? " And as you remorons predicted that we would have 1.4 Million fewer employed by now if we voted to leave, it makes your scaremongering bullshit campaign look like it was....utter bollocks. But the remorons were taken in by it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Andcthe last few pointscjust goes to prove... Say they're worried about job losses if we brexit, but couldn't give a shit about british jobs if we're in the EU. Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons. Except that as your fellow gammon Centaur is fond of posting about, we have the highest employment rate in 40years. From being in the EU. So are you saying there would be full employment were it not for the EU? And as you remorons predicted that we would have 1.4 Million fewer employed by now if we voted to leave, it makes your scaremongering bullshit campaign look like it was....utter bollocks. But the remorons were taken in by it." No no, don't throw a dead cat on the table. Do we have the highest employment rate in 40 years IN SPITE of still being in the EU at this time? That was your point, about job losses to the EU, which are quite clearly a steaming pile of horse shite. Only time will tell if the predictions (of pretty much every body of merit) that we will take several percentage points of hit on economy after we actually Brexit, come true. But with trade tariffs, customs checks, general financial uncertainty etc, the odds don't look good. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Andcthe last few pointscjust goes to prove... Say they're worried about job losses if we brexit, but couldn't give a shit about british jobs if we're in the EU. Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons. Seeing as you didn't have the balls to respond to my last post. I will assume you were completely ignorant of the fact that the FTAs brexiters want to sign all over the world will include the right to bid on UK government contracts. You guys bitch about France or Germany being able to under cut us, yet want to sign FTAs with China and India! You guys make me laugh! That's rich coming from you, who has made an artform of never answerimg questions, so much so that you actually had to start a thread asking people to ask you questions and you'd answer them! FYI, I don't mind other countries being able to bid for UK government contracts, but I do want our government to have the sovereignty to be able to let those contracts to our own companies in preference to others if they wish. Which remorons don't. They won't be able to though. In the same way you won't want British companies to be told that even though they were the best bid, they didn't get the contract because some domestic company got it instead. " Again, seeing as you cant answer that, I assume you were entirely ignorant of the fact. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Andcthe last few pointscjust goes to prove... Say they're worried about job losses if we brexit, but couldn't give a shit about british jobs if we're in the EU. Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons. Except that as your fellow gammon Centaur is fond of posting about, we have the highest employment rate in 40years. From being in the EU. So are you saying there would be full employment were it not for the EU? And as you remorons predicted that we would have 1.4 Million fewer employed by now if we voted to leave, it makes your scaremongering bullshit campaign look like it was....utter bollocks. But the remorons were taken in by it." Is there a certain number of times Brexiters have to be told that not triggering A50 the day after the election changed the dynamics? Because if there is Ill repeat it that many times. If A50 had been triggered the day after the UK would be out of the EU next month which would be disastrous for the UK. Do you think that the Tories waited 9 months to craft the politest letter possible? Or was it because they needed time to minimise the damage and better prepare for Brexit and the negotiations? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't understand why Teresa may is still listening to Johnson and co , it's to business in the UK she needs to listen too they say the need open borders for trade to keep going ,it's time to ignore them other twats " At the end of the day it will come down to parliamentary arithmetic, JRM, BoJo, Fox and Davis don't have the votes to get their version of Brexit through the Commons or the Lords. Many Brexiters "said" they were voting for parliamentary sovereignty, this is it! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons." How about minding your language a bit? Insulting others for having different views than you is neither big not clever. Just because you are a brextremist, doesn't mean that you need to prove that title every chance you get. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't understand why Teresa may is still listening to Johnson and co , it's to business in the UK she needs to listen too they say the need open borders for trade to keep going ,it's time to ignore them other twats At the end of the day it will come down to parliamentary arithmetic, JRM, BoJo, Fox and Davis don't have the votes to get their version of Brexit through the Commons or the Lords. Many Brexiters "said" they were voting for parliamentary sovereignty, this is it! " Does that include the 9 new Conservative Lords, plus 1 new DUP Lord, minus the 3 new Labour Lords? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't understand why Teresa may is still listening to Johnson and co , it's to business in the UK she needs to listen too they say the need open borders for trade to keep going ,it's time to ignore them other twats At the end of the day it will come down to parliamentary arithmetic, JRM, BoJo, Fox and Davis don't have the votes to get their version of Brexit through the Commons or the Lords. Many Brexiters "said" they were voting for parliamentary sovereignty, this is it! Does that include the 9 new Conservative Lords, plus 1 new DUP Lord, minus the 3 new Labour Lords? "Yes, it does. Do you think JRM and Anna Soubry are ever gonna vote the same way on Brexit legislation? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I don't understand why Teresa may is still listening to Johnson and co , it's to business in the UK she needs to listen too they say the need open borders for trade to keep going ,it's time to ignore them other twats At the end of the day it will come down to parliamentary arithmetic, JRM, BoJo, Fox and Davis don't have the votes to get their version of Brexit through the Commons or the Lords. Many Brexiters "said" they were voting for parliamentary sovereignty, this is it! Does that include the 9 new Conservative Lords, plus 1 new DUP Lord, minus the 3 new Labour Lords?
Yes, it does.
Do you think JRM and Anna Soubry are ever gonna vote the same way on Brexit legislation? "Nope. As I've said for a year now, Brexit is undeliverable. Any sort of fudge is damaging, and the both sides are now too untrenched to concede any ground. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| Reply privately |
"Andcthe last few pointscjust goes to prove... Say they're worried about job losses if we brexit, but couldn't give a shit about british jobs if we're in the EU. Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons. Seeing as you didn't have the balls to respond to my last post. I will assume you were completely ignorant of the fact that the FTAs brexiters want to sign all over the world will include the right to bid on UK government contracts. You guys bitch about France or Germany being able to under cut us, yet want to sign FTAs with China and India! You guys make me laugh! That's rich coming from you, who has made an artform of never answerimg questions, so much so that you actually had to start a thread asking people to ask you questions and you'd answer them! FYI, I don't mind other countries being able to bid for UK government contracts, but I do want our government to have the sovereignty to be able to let those contracts to our own companies in preference to others if they wish. Which remorons don't. They won't be able to though. In the same way you won't want British companies to be told that even though they were the best bid, they didn't get the contract because some domestic company got it instead. Again, seeing as you cant answer that, I assume you were entirely ignorant of the fact." I answered it. Maybe you can't read. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Andcthe last few pointscjust goes to prove... Say they're worried about job losses if we brexit, but couldn't give a shit about british jobs if we're in the EU. Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons. Except that as your fellow gammon Centaur is fond of posting about, we have the highest employment rate in 40years. From being in the EU. So are you saying there would be full employment were it not for the EU? And as you remorons predicted that we would have 1.4 Million fewer employed by now if we voted to leave, it makes your scaremongering bullshit campaign look like it was....utter bollocks. But the remorons were taken in by it. Is there a certain number of times Brexiters have to be told that not triggering A50 the day after the election changed the dynamics? Because if there is Ill repeat it that many times. If A50 had been triggered the day after the UK would be out of the EU next month which would be disastrous for the UK. Do you think that the Tories waited 9 months to craft the politest letter possible? Or was it because they needed time to minimise the damage and better prepare for Brexit and the negotiations?" Is there a certain number of times that remorons have to be referred to the remain campaign's own much vaunted treasury report "the immediate impact of a vote to leave the EU', noting 'a vote to leave', not 'triggering article 50'. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons. How about minding your language a bit? Insulting others for having different views than you is neither big not clever. Just because you are a brextremist, doesn't mean that you need to prove that title every chance you get." I note you haven't posted anything against remainers' 'insults' of leavers. And you are just as guilty calling brexiters 'brextremists'. Oh, the irony! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons. How about minding your language a bit? Insulting others for having different views than you is neither big not clever. Just because you are a brextremist, doesn't mean that you need to prove that title every chance you get. I note you haven't posted anything against remainers' 'insults' of leavers. And you are just as guilty calling brexiters 'brextremists'. Oh, the irony! " The "brextremist" was making a point about the language you used and keep using. Tone it down with the insults. Unless that's the only way you can make yourself feel better because you lack both the respect and the intelligence to make your argument in a civil manner, in which case you only validate the "brextremist" point. Take that for irony! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons. How about minding your language a bit? Insulting others for having different views than you is neither big not clever. Just because you are a brextremist, doesn't mean that you need to prove that title every chance you get. I note you haven't posted anything against remainers' 'insults' of leavers. And you are just as guilty calling brexiters 'brextremists'. Oh, the irony! The "brextremist" was making a point about the language you used and keep using. Tone it down with the insults. Unless that's the only way you can make yourself feel better because you lack both the respect and the intelligence to make your argument in a civil manner, in which case you only validate the "brextremist" point. Take that for irony! " What tone of language, other than remorons, have i used that is insulting? And again, why don't you go through this thread, and others, see the insults that fly from certain remainers on here, and then tell them to tone it down? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Just a thought. We have been in the EU for 44 years, so based on that the only people who know what it was like before we joined would have to be 50+. So everyone under that age has no idea of what it was like. Watching tv and the lights went off - power cuts to save electric. The 3 day week again to save power. Strikes - anyone remember "red robo" - the guy who brought British Leyland to its knees? We were the sick man of Europe, inflation at 26%.The American's used to joke about the only way we could make things better was to become the 51st state! Just imagine Trump ruling over us! The good old days - we're they?" Yep, 3 day week, 1973,74 Strikes- late 70's early 80's Red Robbo- active from 1975 through to the late 70's early 80's Inflation peaked in 1975/76 at 26% We joined the EU befire all this! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Andcthe last few pointscjust goes to prove... Say they're worried about job losses if we brexit, but couldn't give a shit about british jobs if we're in the EU. Not remainers, not remoaners... More like remorons. Seeing as you didn't have the balls to respond to my last post. I will assume you were completely ignorant of the fact that the FTAs brexiters want to sign all over the world will include the right to bid on UK government contracts. You guys bitch about France or Germany being able to under cut us, yet want to sign FTAs with China and India! You guys make me laugh! That's rich coming from you, who has made an artform of never answerimg questions, so much so that you actually had to start a thread asking people to ask you questions and you'd answer them! FYI, I don't mind other countries being able to bid for UK government contracts, but I do want our government to have the sovereignty to be able to let those contracts to our own companies in preference to others if they wish. Which remorons don't. They won't be able to though. In the same way you won't want British companies to be told that even though they were the best bid, they didn't get the contract because some domestic company got it instead. Again, seeing as you cant answer that, I assume you were entirely ignorant of the fact. I answered it. Maybe you can't read." No, you just pretended that the government won't be bound by rules of these FTAs and that there won't be any repercussions for ignoring them. If we sign FTAs with other countries, it's extremely likely that this will include a bid on governments contracts. That is a standard part of a FTA. The government won't be able to just ignore bids from foreign companies and give all their contacts to British companies. The other country will raise a grievance with whatever the dispute resolution mechanism is specified in the FTA. That body will then rule on behalf of the other country, and fine the UK government. What do you think other countries will do when they see that the UK can't be trusted to stick to their agreements? Do you honestly believe they will want to sign FTAs with us? Do you really not know how these things work? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Just a thought. We have been in the EU for 44 years, so based on that the only people who know what it was like before we joined would have to be 50+. So everyone under that age has no idea of what it was like. Watching tv and the lights went off - power cuts to save electric. The 3 day week again to save power. Strikes - anyone remember "red robo" - the guy who brought British Leyland to its knees? We were the sick man of Europe, inflation at 26%.The American's used to joke about the only way we could make things better was to become the 51st state! Just imagine Trump ruling over us! The good old days - we're they? Yep, 3 day week, 1973,74 Strikes- late 70's early 80's Red Robbo- active from 1975 through to the late 70's early 80's Inflation peaked in 1975/76 at 26% We joined the EU befire all this!" Nope, the EU didn't exist back then, you're thinking of the common market. You know, the common market that brexiters often say was really good, before it morphed into the EU. The common market that brexiters say they would happy to be in. Yeah, that's what you are talking about. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Just a thought. We have been in the EU for 44 years, so based on that the only people who know what it was like before we joined would have to be 50+. So everyone under that age has no idea of what it was like. Watching tv and the lights went off - power cuts to save electric. The 3 day week again to save power. Strikes - anyone remember "red robo" - the guy who brought British Leyland to its knees? We were the sick man of Europe, inflation at 26%.The American's used to joke about the only way we could make things better was to become the 51st state! Just imagine Trump ruling over us! The good old days - we're they? Yep, 3 day week, 1973,74 Strikes- late 70's early 80's Red Robbo- active from 1975 through to the late 70's early 80's Inflation peaked in 1975/76 at 26% We joined the EU befire all this! Nope, the EU didn't exist back then, you're thinking of the common market. You know, the common market that brexiters often say was really good, before it morphed into the EU. The common market that brexiters say they would happy to be in. Yeah, that's what you are talking about. "To be fair, I doubt any of this was caused by the common market, or prevented by being in the EU. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
