What does "the sort of deals we would get was Norway + or a Canada +" even mean?
Did Britain vote to leave with some deal, or did they just vote to leave? What this sounds like is voters believing in vague campaign promises from politicians.
But they did vote to leave. No particular deal was mentioned. That's voting to leave with no deal.
EU doesn't like the deals offered by Britain. Britain doesn't like the deals offered by the EU. But Britain already voted to leave, so they don't really have any leverage. They're committed to Brexit, but the EU is not.
So, why should the EU offer anything but the most advantageous terms for EU member countries? Isn't that the point to the EU?
Tom
Again, I am asking questions. I can barely keep up with the stupidity of my own country. I don't claim to understand European stupidity.
Very few voted to fk the country, no deal will. The vast majority of analyst's agree that no deal will be disastrous for the UK economy, housing and infrastructure for at least the next 10 years. Already supermarkets are stockpiling food in case of a no deal because they expect major food shortages.
The EU have accepted the deal offered by May, the UK government are the ones who will not vote it into law. People like NAN are quick to shift the blame for failure to the EU, this is blatantly untrue. Three times has the draft agreement (that is acceptable to europe) failed to get through the house of commons.
What does "the sort of deals we would get was Norway + or a Canada +" even mean?
Did Britain vote to leave with some deal, or did they just vote to leave? What this sounds like is voters believing in vague campaign promises from politicians.
But it was in fact a voting majority, correct?
For whatever reason, Brexit passed.
And no deal was mentioned.
Brexit, no deal, is what was voted on and won the vote.
The vast majority of analyst's agree that no deal will be disastrous for the UK economy, housing and infrastructure for at least the next 10 years. Already supermarkets are stockpiling food in case of a no deal because they expect major food shortages.
That doesn't change the fact that "Brexit, no deal" won the vote. And since it did, the EU has no motivation to make Britain friendly deals. They have every reason to play economic hardball, with the ruthlessness EuroChristians are famous for.
So, Brexit is disastrous for the British economy. Plenty of people said it would be. The British people voted for it anyway, didn't they?
Tom
But it was in fact a voting majority, correct?
For whatever reason, Brexit passed.
And no deal was mentioned.
Brexit, no deal, is what was voted on and won the vote.
That doesn't change the fact that "Brexit, no deal" won the vote. And since it did, the EU has no motivation to make Britain friendly deals. They have every reason to play economic hardball, with the ruthlessness EuroChristians are famous for.
So, Brexit is disastrous for the British economy. Plenty of people said it would be. The British people voted for it anyway, didn't they?
Tom
How is that different from "Brexit, no deal" winning the vote.
The EU doesn't seem to recognize the difference. Why should they? Why is anybody surprised that they are pressing their clear advantage? Brits don't actually want to leave, and the EU knows that.
Britain looks like they screwed the pooch, voting to Leave without having a deal that they like. And the EU has no reason to give them one.
Tom
Yep - that's exactly what happened - and judging by a fair proportion of this thread, we haven't learned very much from the experience. I fear that politically Mrs May's "country that I love" is turning into a pale parody of another part of the world. Voting for Brexit made no sense whatsoever and whatever the next leader does will not change that - I have no idea why so many leading politicians are so eager to grab the poisoned chalice - wait a minute - yes I do...they're all jumped-up dumbass f'wits who, but for Brexit, would have absolutely no chance of being the leader of anything...I suspect the next leader might not be the last before Brexit finally happens...but I don't think anyone should shed tears for the loss of a few Tory PMs...they'll be ten a penny by the time the dust settles on Brexit.
Britain losing global status in their fight with the EU will definitely impact the business of the USA. For the profitability.
The USA will exploit the rift as much as anybody, probably more than China or Russia.
And Trump will take credit for the increased profitability. The British handed Trump a victory.
Tom
The EU waited a long time for the UK to spell out what it even wanted. When we eventually managed to figure that out it involved being given terms than existing EU members. That's not a reasonable request. What sort of club would give a better deal to non-members than members? How long would you expect such a club to survive?
They're placing their existing members interests ahead of the UK's. Doing this makes them neither greedy, nor tyrants. Just because the UK proposes something doesn't mean they have to kowtow immediately to any and all demands we make.
That's a very entitled attitude.
When the E.U takes U.Ks money for being apart of the E.U. Then the U.K decides they want to leave. But the E.U. won't let them leave, threatening to not trade with the I.K etc, while still taking money from the U.K.
Sounds like extortion to me.
ex·tor·tion
/ikˈstôrSH(ə)n/ noun
the practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats.
That's not extortion. That's the EU ensuring the UK will continue to pay money it has legally agreed to pay for services it is still currently enjoying benefits from. If the UK refuses it is a) trying to benefit from these services without paying for it; and b) making itself look extremely untrustworthy to the international community because it's willing to default on established, legally binding agreements.
Extortion would be trying to get extra money from us above and beyond what the UK has already agreed to pay. This is not what the EU are doing. They are trying to ensure we honour pre-existing financial obligations.
How is that different from "Brexit, no deal" winning the vote.
The EU doesn't seem to recognize the difference. Why should they? Why is anybody surprised that they are pressing their clear advantage? Brits don't actually want to leave, and the EU knows that.
Britain looks like they screwed the pooch, voting to Leave without having a deal that they like. And the EU has no reason to give them one.
Tom
No deal was neither mentioned nor implied on the ballot paper.
The question was "Should the United Kingdom remain a member ofthe European Union or leave the European Union". Our European Union membership was mentioned in the question; not our membership of the Customs Union, nor our membership of the Single Market. While these three things coincide in many cases, they are not the same.
Since the vote did not cover Single Market or Customs Union membership it is unfair, indeed it is deceitful, to state that the result was for a no-deal Brexit as that is beyond the remit of the question on the ballot paper.
Further, the pro-Brexit campaign repeatedly stated pre-ballot that they were not seeking a no-deal Brexit. They consistently said we should be like Norway - a country with Single Market access but was not an EU member as they had 'the best of both worlds'. I remember this distinctly because I agreed with this until about 6 months before the date of the vote. I took a college module on business law as part of my Accounting studies which explained how European law works and is applied here. It's not what Brexiteers claim it is.
Now they've got their way they've changed their tune. Especially that odious wretch, Farage. But that's far from the only deceit they've engaged in.
They were.
A vote was held.
Leave won. Nothing about any deal. No staying part of this, but not that.
The British people voted "Leave!".
But now they won't.
They're starting to remind me of a young person who decides to run away from home. But wants to know what time is dinner, and who will pack their things.
But not too heavy, or it shan't be fair for them to have to carry it all to their new place.
Wherever that is.
Tom
Of course you wouldn't be inclined to think that when you're a Brexit Party Ltd supporter. If the EU invented a cure for all kinds of cancer you'd probably be salty at them for causing a downturn in the funeral industry.
Of course the only 'reasonable request' to a Brexit supporter involves accommodating English/British exceptionalism by giving the UK better terms than existing EU members and recognising British 'superiority'.
No, but I think the citizens of the U.K. demand to at least be heard, respected, and considered.
That's not the way this works though. We don't and have never lived in a direct democracy. We live in a representative democracy - we elect people to represent us i.e. MPs, MSPs, AMs, MEPs etc. Many Leave voters say they voted as they did to restore Parliamentary sovereignty i.e. to hand responsibility for ensuring Brexit to Parliament. Now you're acting all surprised that said body is about as efficient & fast-moving as a paraplegic turtle.
Amounts to the same thing when the E.U. wants to play hard ball and not let the U.K leave under a fair deal.
The EU is not playing hard ball; they've maintained a perfectly reasonable and consistent position from the get go - if the UK wants Single Market & Customs Union access, they have to abide by the same rules that everyone else does. The only people who would object to this are those who want the UK to be given preferential treatment.
Illegally. That's not my opinion by the way. That's the opinion of the Electoral Commission. The body that's responsible for ensuring elections & ballots are conducted freely, fairly & legally.
Nothing about any deal. No staying part of this, but not that.
No mention of the Single Market or Customs Union either. Time for Brexiteers to be honest & stop liberally reinterpreting the result to mean whatever they want.
The British people voted "Leave!".
But now they won't.
The UK is still on track to leave though. That's the default position should we reach the end of the deadline extension with no deal concluded (and Brussels has stated they will not give us another extension). If, if Parliament revokes Article 50, then your position will have merit. Not a moment before.
They're starting to remind me of a young person who decides to run away from home. But wants to know what time is dinner, and who will pack their things.
But not too heavy, or it shan't be fair for them to have to carry it all to their new place.
Wherever that is.
Tom
And Brexit supporters have, for some time, been reminding me of an indignant toddler who has been told he's going to get Macdonalds for dinner but is throwing a tantrum because he wants to go now. Right NOW!!!
How is that different from "Brexit, no deal" winning the vote.
The EU doesn't seem to recognize the difference. Why should they? Why is anybody surprised that they are pressing their clear advantage? Brits don't actually want to leave, and the EU knows that.
Britain looks like they screwed the pooch, voting to Leave without having a deal that they like. And the EU has no reason to give them one.
Tom
