letter from Boris Johnson to Donald Tusk

[durhamplumber]

Ive argued on here a number of times that just because Brexiteers are have less academic wualifications like degrees, does not make them less intelligent.

What?

 

[Notch7]

Correct,,,give you that 1

So DP doesnt where he is going.

So that means PD does not know if the destination is better than we have now.

So DP has not a single argument for leaving, just blind faith.

 

[durhamplumber]

So DP doesnt where he is going.

Notchy,,are you pizzd or cokeyed?

 

[durhamplumber]

So that means PD does not know if the destination is better than we have now.

So DP has not a single argument for leaving, just blind faith.

Rofl...what a hoot.

 

[SirGalahad]

When it comes to workers rights do you believe that the UK parliament is incapable of protecting those rights.
People get the politicians they vote for.

Unfortunately look across the pond, it's where we are heading, "At Will" States - money has ruined politics in the US and it's slowly eroding the UK as well.

So I don't have much faith in the current set of Tories to ensure worker rights. How is it that protecting people wanting to work is seen as a discussion point.

 

[SirGalahad]

You will find Brexiteers do not profess to be very religious take Brexit as an article of faith, they would sooner renounce their loved ones before they renounce Brexit.

 

[Notch7]

Rofl...what a hoot.

DPs thinks wrecking the farming industry around Durham a hoot

 

[SirGalahad]

DPs thinks wrecking the farming industry around Durham a hoot

All Agriculuture and Manufacturing. Their sage minfords own words - to run down 20% of the UK economy. The same Brexiteers decry losing real jobs and manufacturung ability but then defend Brexit with gusto.

Every Brexiteer should watch that and accept their responsibility in that. Minford et al do not believe in countries as much as global markets, the irony is that Brexiteers believe that we will be taking back control, we won't we will be lowerin protections and leaving the UK exposed to the market - this is the core belief of these wild eyed psychos - the market is always right. In reality what that means is the most powerful operators in the market will have undue influence in shaping the market. Their theories on the market are based on theories of perfect competition but in reality there are so many obstacles such as asymetric information, legal, comparative advantages etc.

 

[durhamplumber]

they would sooner renounce their loved ones before they renounce Brexit.

You do talk garbage for a chap who considers himself intelligent.

 

[Lower]

That is not the point, other EU nations applied it.
I disagree that we didn't expect the large influx of people -it was a deliberate policy to feed our economy.

That is precisely my point. Whether it was a deliberate policy or not, the EU prevented us from changing that policy when it became a problem.

However if you are concerned about the number of immigrants, then it makes little sense to not include the 500,000 overstayers.

Yes, i agree. Albeit the numbers of overstayers vs EU nationals changed substantially yesteday as have decided they weren't counting them correctly.

However, we have the ability and right to address the non EU overstayers and i believe we are now starting to. However, i reiterate my point about not having the ability to alter how many EU citizens we accept on an ongoing basis.

if you are concerned on the pressure on the health service then perhaps you should be concerned with the 100,000 shortage of NHS workers.
Lets not forget shortage in agriculture, care etc.
If the UK choose a neo liberal policy, they need immigrants to feed it.

I agree. With a points based system and proper control over who we accept on a work permit we can still have the immigration that we need. But the key point is we can change who comes and how long they stay to meet the countries requirements.

I agree that free movement should be looked at, it is a problem for some of the EU countries that have lost a lot of skilled workers.
Leaving the EU is not the solution for that

David Cameron tried, the EU refused to allow a change to one of the fundamental rights of the EU, ie free movement of people. Italy and Hungary are flouting EU rules at the moment, yet the EU still refuses to consider a change. It is exactly that attitude that has changed my mind as to whether we remain or leave.

 

[Notch7]

You do talk garbage for a chap who considers himself intelligent.

Perhaps DP has some farming mates. He doesnt care if they lose everything, he just wants Brexit.

DP why do you denounce verifiable information as garbage, yet at the same time admit you have no interest in learning.

What it actually means is that you are simply arguing from a position of no understanding.

Why would you do that to yourself?

 

[SirGalahad]

You do talk garbage for a chap who considers himself intelligent.

Minfords own words. Care to respond to them?

 

[Lower]

1. You mean this judgement. https://www.eversheds-sutherland.co...-ruling-on-holiday-pay-and-voluntary-overtime
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29896617

Which means employers were not calculating the Holiday Wages correctly. So it's not the EU fault.

As ever, its not that simple. UK employment law as clear. Overtime has never been included in holiday pay unless specifically detailed in the employment contract. The EU decided that it should be included for regular and enforced overtime but changed the law for all overtime. I'm not happy about that as it was not an error in calculation by employers, it was an long established practice in the UK. However, laws change from time to time and you adjust your business model to compensate. What particularly annoyed me about this one was the EU decided that the way we paid overtime was wrong and applied it retrospectively with no time limitation. That is just blatantly unfair in my opinion. Workers in this country weren't complaining that it was unfair, it was long established in our law and custom and practice. The UK government challenged the ruling and lost. That is the EU's fault.

So you say its irrelevant why we buy more than we sell but then complain why the Government cannot bail out British Steel. You just contradicted yourself.

No, British steel was hit by a change in Carbon credit rules and a drop in the value of the pound. In my opinion it was entirely right that the government should support a viable industry in the short term but it was prevented from doing so and a viable business has now been sold overseas.

We do buy more than we sell, but in specific areas. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to chose to support industries that struggle at particular points in the economic cycle. Particularly industries that require massive capital investment to set up from scratch.

So we should be flex our consumpion power in trade deals - that's old hat, we were part of a buying consortium as part of the EU now we will be on our own. Not great logic.

We were part of a buying consortium that was unweidly, struggled to do trade deals in a timely manner and made trade deals that on occasion hurt its members. EG honda stopping production in the UK. Not because of brexit or because it wanted to move production to the EU. Japan did a free trade deal with the EU so no tarrifs on imports from Japan. Therefore no requirement for a factory in the UK or the EU because Japan now has tariff free access to the EU.

As an independent nation with significant demand and the ability to do our own trade deals, we will be an attractive trade partner to the rest of the world. I do not understand how you can deny that.

5. That maybe the case - I could bring examples from finance but the thrust of these regulations or standards was primarily in response to market failure where self regulation failed.

The creating of regulations and standards is not exclusive to the EU, but the concept of one size fits all is. One size does not fit all across the EU and in my experience of the EU's application of standards to products they have created unnecessary complex an expensive regulatory system in many cases which was not done to address deficiencies.

We're not going to agree. You have your opinions and i have mine. Both Brexiteers and Remainers have strong arguments to support their views. But both parties should also respect the alternative view and not assume that they are stupid because they have different views.

 

[Notch7]

Both Brexiteers and Remainers have strong arguments to support their views. But both parties should also respect the alternative view and not assume that they are stupid because they have different views.

I agree, there has been far too much cries of dumb quitters on here.

But I would add:

Brexit has been sold on sound bites. Politicians have used the technique of making leavers angry, particularly in regard to immigration.

The Tory party are now blatantly lying about their beliefs -they are only interested in Brexit, because failure means huge damage to their party.


In regards to strong arguments for Brexit, I disagree, because fundamentally Brexiteers are entirely focused on Leaving, they have made no consideration for the destination.

I would argue that is the failure in your argument. If the UK leave the EU, it then has no power in negotiations because it HAS to have deals, so the UK will have to go to the biggest trading regions in the world: 'we have to have deal'.

WTO as a trading organisation is much worse that the EU

 

[Lower]

I agree, there has been far too much cries of dumb quitters on here.

Remainers and Brexiteers can agree on something

But I would add:

Brexit has been sold on sound bites. Politicians have used the technique of making leavers angry, particularly in regard to immigration.

The Tory party are now blatantly lying about their beliefs -they are only interested in Brexit, because failure means huge damage to their party.

I agree that Brexit (and the remain counter argument) has been sold on sound bites. But politicians have also sold remain on fear.

I don't agree that the Tory party is lying. Boris Johnson has been consistent in his views regarding leaving with a good deal or no deal, unlike our previous PM. However, Parliament, the Torys and labour are as split as the rest of the country. If anyone really has been nebulous it's Jeremy Corbyn who has been as vague as can be about his views and flip flops which ever way is necessary with the sole aim of a desperate power grab and not the best interests of the country.

In regards to strong arguments for Brexit, I disagree, because fundamentally Brexiteers are entirely focused on Leaving, they have made no consideration for the destination.

I would argue that is the failure in your argument. If the UK leave the EU, it then has no power in negotiations because it HAS to have deals, so the UK will have to go to the biggest trading regions in the world: 'we have to have deal'.

WTO as a trading organisation is much worse that the EU

I respect your arguments and views. However my view is different. At the moment it feels like we're only focused on Brexit and not what comes after because actually achieving Brexit is proving to be so hard (with regards to the EU's stance and our own MP's failing to support any kind of deal which allows us to leave the EU and not be bound by its rules). Leaving Brexit has sucked up all the politician's and the media's time and energy and we are not allowed to negotiate trade deals with other countries until we've actually left. That in itself makes it very hard to start publicising the post brexit opportunities.

If we can actually get it over the line, deal with the short term fall out (at whatever level it occurs depending on whether we get a deal or not), we can then start looking forward to a post Brexit world.

Other countries want to trade with us. We are a potential great customer for then and vice versa. WTO rules will only be temporary.

We are an innovative, exciting and capable country. We will have a strong economy one way or the other and i look forward with great positivity to getting out of this current stalemate.