|
|
Post by pearo on Oct 1, 2018 21:08:12 GMT
My lies are not s**t they are blatant LIES. |
|
|
|
Post by sorethumbs on Oct 1, 2018 22:11:11 GMT
I don't know who this Richard Ault is but I would hazard a good guess he voted to remain? And I can probably guess he's done a few reports that would be considered pro remain. Just who did 'the Sentinal' ask in this latest 'poll of the people of Stoke on Trent' to come to the conclusion of 'overwhelming support' for Ref2? Nobody asked me. I've asked my friends, of whom only one voted to remain, on many occasions since the referendum, if any of them would reconsider their choice. None of them would. Those who voted to leave feel even more strongly that it was the right decision and angry at all the scuppering going on. I've also done a Facebook poll (public) and there was still an overwhelming majority in favour of leave. A very small amount of people said they would choose differently if there was to be a new vote (evenly split to choose the opposite from one to the other) So to summarise I would say yes, probably fake news but hey, you believe whatever floats your boat smallthorner I'm just stating what it says in the Sentinel mate. Suppose there is always the possibility of the Sentinel being involved in a conspiracy theory and printing fake news on a Monday night. The press association must be informed. Maggie from the chip shop was coerced into giving a false answer to the questions. The world's gone fudging mad. Not read the article mate but all I'm saying about it (assuming it's alluding to some massive swing in favour of another Ref) is - if you ask the right people then you'll find that you can get the answer you want |
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Oct 2, 2018 5:42:04 GMT
The euro is not a fundamental part of the EU. We have been in te EU for years and don’t have it. The four freedoms are the fundamental parts of the EU. Something you (and our government) don’t seem to get Yes and the four freedom s. With respect Oggy it's a bit ridiculous to say that the Euro isn't fundamental to the EU. They created the currency , used I think by 16/19 members. An essential part of Political and Economic union....the whole purpose of the EU If the Euro is fundamental to the EU, and the EU is an authoritarian overlord determined to take away our sovereignty and control us politically and financially - can you explain why it was not forced upon us and why we still have the GDP? And the same for Schengen? |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 2, 2018 5:49:20 GMT
Yes and the four freedom s. With respect Oggy it's a bit ridiculous to say that the Euro isn't fundamental to the EU. They created the currency , used I think by 16/19 members. An essential part of Political and Economic union....the whole purpose of the EU If the Euro is fundamental to the EU, and the EU is an authoritarian overlord determined to take away our sovereignty and control us politically and financially - can you explain why it was not forced upon us and why we still have the GDP? And the same for Schengen? Ever closer union.,...it's a journey. 40 years ago Political union wasn't openly mentioned. Now it is. EU army wasn't mentioned. Now it is etc etc. Very carellh chosen words. . " ever" means "ever". "Union" means "union". Therein lies the deceit and why this attempt to control Europe is dangerous. As a previous poster said ( I must look back at "who"? with insight" Stealth") Read the five presidents' report for starters. And surely you are not arguing that a country's currency is not fundamental to the economy and citizens' lives. The better question to ask is why the EU would like a sovereign UK to have the 4 freedoms to trade |
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Oct 2, 2018 5:57:06 GMT
If the Euro is fundamental to the EU, and the EU is an authoritarian overlord determined to take away our sovereignty and control us politically and financially - can you explain why it was not forced upon us and why we still have the GDP? And the same for Schengen? Ever closer union.,...it's a journey. 40 years ago Political union wasn't openly mentioned. Now it is. EU army wasn't mentioned. Now it is etc etc. Very carellh chosen words. . " ever" means "ever". "Union" means "union". Therein lies the deceit and why this attempt to control Europe is dangerous. As a previous poster said ( I must look back at "who"? with insight" Stealth") Read the five presidents' report for starters. And surely you are not arguing that a country's currency is not fundamental to the economy and citizens' lives. The better question to ask is why the EU would like a sovereign UK to have the 4 freedoms to trade The question was why don't we have the Euro and Schengen now? The EU has had plenty of time to coerce and force us into having it. When was the last time we came close to having either of those two? Preeicting whether we would be forced to have it in the future, given we're leaving, is the sort of doom-mongering, impossible-to-predict, Project Fear type of stuff that I thought we were trying to avoid. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 2, 2018 6:17:05 GMT
Ever closer union.,...it's a journey. 40 years ago Political union wasn't openly mentioned. Now it is. EU army wasn't mentioned. Now it is etc etc. Very carellh chosen words. . " ever" means "ever". "Union" means "union". Therein lies the deceit and why this attempt to control Europe is dangerous. As a previous poster said ( I must look back at "who"? with insight" Stealth") Read the five presidents' report for starters. And surely you are not arguing that a country's currency is not fundamental to the economy and citizens' lives. The better question to ask is why the EU would like a sovereign UK to have the 4 freedoms to trade The question was why don't we have the Euro and Schengen now? The EU has had plenty of time to coerce and force us into having it. When was the last time we came close to having either of those two? Preeicting whether we would be forced to have it in the future, given we're leaving, is the sort of doom-mongering, impossible-to-predict, Project Fear type of stuff that I thought we were trying to avoid. Because it's a journey. I can't put simpler than that. The better point probably is to ask Merkel" would you like all European countries to share the Euro?"...I think her answer would indicate the intent. Also it isn't all about the UK. Many countries do have the Euro. New members are required to do so. |
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Oct 2, 2018 6:25:40 GMT
The question was why don't we have the Euro and Schengen now? The EU has had plenty of time to coerce and force us into having it. When was the last time we came close to having either of those two? Preeicting whether we would be forced to have it in the future, given we're leaving, is the sort of doom-mongering, impossible-to-predict, Project Fear type of stuff that I thought we were trying to avoid. Because it's a journey. I can't put simpler than that. The better point probably is to ask Merkel" would you like all European countries to share the Euro?"...I think her answer would indicate the intent. Also it isn't all about the UK. Many countries do have the Euro. New members are required to do so. The United Kingdom is a journey, as the relationship between England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland continually changes. If you asked Theresa May, deep down, if she could get rid of all devolved governments and be the single leader of all four countries, I'd put my house on her saying yes. It doesn't mean it's going to happen does it? If we're not talking about the UK when we talk about Brexit, I'm not sure what we're talking about. |
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Oct 2, 2018 6:27:14 GMT
Not sure how you got that response, you are twisting things again, the possibibilty of WTO rules was always an option and has been spoken about for a long time, May has already said about EU nationals. Companies are preparing for flights etc. and have got new routes planned for next year, its only you with your head in the sand. You have said that you don’t want to keep the UK in any agreement with the EU. How on earth do we land a plane on EU terrotory without such an agreement!? How do we trade with the EU without any agreement (including WTO rules)? How will it work? I said we are leaving the EU, we can have deals with them like other nations around the world. |
|
|
|
Post by skemstokie on Oct 2, 2018 8:45:34 GMT
At least I have one, I appreciate it’s probably too challenging for your like to do things like that, does someone else sharpen your pencils for you too. I was expecting a sharp,witty,cutting response from you ? Guess it was beyond you.  |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 2, 2018 9:09:07 GMT
Because it's a journey. I can't put simpler than that. The better point probably is to ask Merkel" would you like all European countries to share the Euro?"...I think her answer would indicate the intent. Also it isn't all about the UK. Many countries do have the Euro. New members are required to do so. The United Kingdom is a journey, as the relationship between England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland continually changes. If you asked Theresa May, deep down, if she could get rid of all devolved governments and be the single leader of all four countries, I'd put my house on her saying yes. It doesn't mean it's going to happen does it? If we're not talking about the UK when we talk about Brexit, I'm not sure what we're talking about. interesting that Rip. Quite correct Relationships between the countries within the UK change as does the UKs relationship with the outside world.One important area of changeand one that the people of the UK are passionate about is self determination, sovereignty, devolved governments and independence. I think it is accepted that the UK is a country in which the main governance us ( or should be pending EU interference) the Westminster parliament. The EU isn't a country. Its an organisation that believes in and aims for Political and Economic union.....in other words;it does indeed aim to be a country....the United States of Europe. With "European" citizens and the diminidhing of national sovereignty. ( these are not my ideas but have clearly been stated in reports and in the EU parliament). So therein lies the issue. I don't want to belong to an organisation that wants political and economic union ( as the EU clearly says it aims for) for the whole of Europe. I want the UK to take back its sovereignty. If the individual countries within the UK wish to become independent, so he it and good luck to them . You it seems clearly want to belong to the EU.....so therefore want Political and Economic union......thats what tge EU is about ( it says so). It isn't a trading bloc. The Euro is fundamental to the political and economic control ( 5 Presidents report), I don't know why you don't simply argue to join.... believe in the EU. And if we don't understand each other, I'm quite happy with that. For me our positions are clear |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 2, 2018 9:18:02 GMT
The euro is not a fundamental part of the EU. We have been in te EU for years and don’t have it. The four freedoms are the fundamental parts of the EU. Something you (and our government) don’t seem to get Yes and the four freedom s. With respect Oggy it's a bit ridiculous to say that the Euro isn't fundamental to the EU. They created the currency , used I think by 16/19 members. An essential part of Political and Economic union....the whole purpose of the EU If the Euro was fundamental to the EU, every nation in it would have to have it. But they don’t. Unlike respecting the four freedoms and rule of law and basic human rights. Those are all fundamental. |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 2, 2018 9:19:17 GMT
You have said that you don’t want to keep the UK in any agreement with the EU. How on earth do we land a plane on EU terrotory without such an agreement!? How do we trade with the EU without any agreement (including WTO rules)? How will it work? I said we are leaving the EU, we can have deals with them like other nations around the world. That’s actually not what you said. Chequers achieves exactly what you say above though so you mist be pleased |
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Oct 2, 2018 9:54:29 GMT
Gina is going to make a brilliant leader of the new Liberal Democrats. Brains, balls and personality. This explains a lot |
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Oct 2, 2018 9:59:20 GMT
The United Kingdom is a journey, as the relationship between England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland continually changes. If you asked Theresa May, deep down, if she could get rid of all devolved governments and be the single leader of all four countries, I'd put my house on her saying yes. It doesn't mean it's going to happen does it? If we're not talking about the UK when we talk about Brexit, I'm not sure what we're talking about. interesting that Rip. Quite correct Relationships between the countries within the UK change as does the UKs relationship with the outside world.One important area of changeand one that the people of the UK are passionate about is self determination, sovereignty, devolved governments and independence. I think it is accepted that the UK is a country in which the main governance us ( or should be pending EU interference) the Westminster parliament. The EU isn't a country. Its an organisation that believes in and aims for Political and Economic union.....in other words;it does indeed aim to be a country....the United States of Europe. With "European" citizens and the diminidhing of national sovereignty. ( these are not my ideas but have clearly been stated in reports and in the EU parliament). So therein lies the issue. I don't want to belong to an organisation that wants political and economic union ( as the EU clearly says it aims for) for the whole of Europe. I want the UK to take back its sovereignty. If the individual countries within the UK wish to become independent, so he it and good luck to them . You it seems clearly want to belong to the EU.....so therefore want Political and Economic union......thats what tge EU is about ( it says so). It isn't a trading bloc. The Euro is fundamental to the political and economic control ( 5 Presidents report), I don't know why you don't simply argue to join.... believe in the EU. And if we don't understand each other, I'm quite happy with that. For me our positions are clear The Euro can't be that fundamental, as they were happy for us and nearly a quarter of the countries of the EU not to join. If it was fundamental, they would've insisted. The rest of it is you projecting when you think is my opinion - despite me clearly stating I think we are better out of the Euro you seem to think I am arguing to be a part of it. I believe a vote to Remain was to keep what we had - which was a unique position in the EU. That is in the EU but out of the Euro and Schengen. Given we've not been close to joining either despite the fact that they've been around since 1984 and 2002 respectively, your 'ever closer union' is either happening a) without the UK (which it will of course after Brexit has been delivered in March) or b) at glacial speed. Your idea that a vote for Remain was a vote for the Euro or complete integration is laughable, but in line with the complete redefinition of the options on offer back in 2016. A vote to Leave was apparently a vote to not just leave the EU (which we are doing but apparently doesn't fulfill the definition of 'Leave') but to leave the EU in a very specific manner (despite this not being written on the ballot), and now a vote to Remain was a vote to join the Euro, dissolve the House of Commons and drive on the 'wrong' side of the road (OK, I added the last one in myself). Remind me again who is delivering Project Fear here? |
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Oct 2, 2018 10:30:31 GMT
A thought.
Suppose there was a second ref with the questions: Remain, leave with a (Chequers?) deal, leave with no deal.
The leave vote is split and Remain wins (that's what Remain want after all)
The EU quite rightly say that having triggered A50 the UK can't assume the status that we had before. New terms of membership will have to be negotiated.
Those terms of membership should surely then be put to a peoples vote to decide if acceptable, if not what then?
|
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Oct 2, 2018 10:53:38 GMT
A thought. Suppose there was a second ref with the questions: Remain, leave with a (Chequers?) deal, leave with no deal. The leave vote is split and Remain wins (that's what Remain want after all) The EU quite rightly say that having triggered A50 the UK can't assume the status that we had before. New terms of membership will have to be negotiated. Those terms of membership should surely then be put to a peoples vote to decide if acceptable, if not what then? It's a fair question - the wording of a second referendum would be very complicated. Personally I don't think it should have the remain option on it. I think people should be given an opportunity to show their opinion on how we leave the EU - in that sense it's a first referendum on the terms of leaving, and not a second referendum on whether we should leave. But how it works in practice is the sticking point, and I can't think of a situation that doesn't involve two votes. For example, a first vote on the Chequers deal - if that is rejected than a question between a 'no deal' Brexit and a softer Brexit. But this then throws up the problem of how you word a softer option. Probably it would have to be outlined that people are voting for a Norway/Switzerland-type deal, but even within that there has to be a bit of wiggle room for a British government to negotiate some caveats into the deal as we have different needs than Norway or Switzerland. My short answer to your question would be "fuck nows" |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 2, 2018 11:02:36 GMT
interesting that Rip. Quite correct Relationships between the countries within the UK change as does the UKs relationship with the outside world.One important area of changeand one that the people of the UK are passionate about is self determination, sovereignty, devolved governments and independence. I think it is accepted that the UK is a country in which the main governance us ( or should be pending EU interference) the Westminster parliament. The EU isn't a country. Its an organisation that believes in and aims for Political and Economic union.....in other words;it does indeed aim to be a country....the United States of Europe. With "European" citizens and the diminidhing of national sovereignty. ( these are not my ideas but have clearly been stated in reports and in the EU parliament). So therein lies the issue. I don't want to belong to an organisation that wants political and economic union ( as the EU clearly says it aims for) for the whole of Europe. I want the UK to take back its sovereignty. If the individual countries within the UK wish to become independent, so he it and good luck to them . You it seems clearly want to belong to the EU.....so therefore want Political and Economic union......thats what tge EU is about ( it says so). It isn't a trading bloc. The Euro is fundamental to the political and economic control ( 5 Presidents report), I don't know why you don't simply argue to join.... believe in the EU. And if we don't understand each other, I'm quite happy with that. For me our positions are clear The Euro can't be that fundamental, as they were happy for us and nearly a quarter of the countries of the EU not to join. If it was fundamental, they would've insisted. The rest of it is you projecting when you think is my opinion - despite me clearly stating I think we are better out of the Euro you seem to think I am arguing to be a part of it. I believe a vote to Remain was to keep what we had - which was a unique position in the EU. That is in the EU but out of the Euro and Schengen. Given we've not been close to joining either despite the fact that they've been around since 1984 and 2002 respectively, your 'ever closer union' is either happening a) without the UK (which it will of course after Brexit has been delivered in March) or b) at glacial speed. Your idea that a vote for Remain was a vote for the Euro or complete integration is laughable, but in line with the complete redefinition of the options on offer back in 2016. A vote to Leave was apparently a vote to not just leave the EU (which we are doing but apparently doesn't fulfill the definition of 'Leave') but to leave the EU in a very specific manner (despite this not being written on the ballot), and now a vote to Remain was a vote to join the Euro, dissolve the House of Commons and drive on the 'wrong' side of the road (OK, I added the last one in myself). Remind me again who is delivering Project Fear here? As I say I am very pleased to disagree with you. But it is the EU that wants ever closer union towards political and economic union ( not my words) and that's the organisation that you are signing up to. Fundamental to that across Europe is the Euro ( amongst other things) |
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Oct 2, 2018 11:05:33 GMT
The Euro can't be that fundamental, as they were happy for us and nearly a quarter of the countries of the EU not to join. If it was fundamental, they would've insisted. The rest of it is you projecting when you think is my opinion - despite me clearly stating I think we are better out of the Euro you seem to think I am arguing to be a part of it. I believe a vote to Remain was to keep what we had - which was a unique position in the EU. That is in the EU but out of the Euro and Schengen. Given we've not been close to joining either despite the fact that they've been around since 1984 and 2002 respectively, your 'ever closer union' is either happening a) without the UK (which it will of course after Brexit has been delivered in March) or b) at glacial speed. Your idea that a vote for Remain was a vote for the Euro or complete integration is laughable, but in line with the complete redefinition of the options on offer back in 2016. A vote to Leave was apparently a vote to not just leave the EU (which we are doing but apparently doesn't fulfill the definition of 'Leave') but to leave the EU in a very specific manner (despite this not being written on the ballot), and now a vote to Remain was a vote to join the Euro, dissolve the House of Commons and drive on the 'wrong' side of the road (OK, I added the last one in myself). Remind me again who is delivering Project Fear here? As I say I am very pleased to disagree with you. But it is the EU that wants ever closer union towards political and economic union ( not my words) and that's the organisation that you are signing up to. Fundamental to that across Europe is the Euro ( amongst other things) Yeah, it's so fundamental that only two-thirds of the member states actually use the Euro. Delighted to disagree with you on this definition of 'fundamental'. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 2, 2018 11:05:56 GMT
Yes and the four freedom s. With respect Oggy it's a bit ridiculous to say that the Euro isn't fundamental to the EU. They created the currency , used I think by 16/19 members. An essential part of Political and Economic union....the whole purpose of the EU If the Euro was fundamental to the EU, every nation in it would have to have it. But they don’t. Unlike respecting the four freedoms and rule of law and basic human rights. Those are all fundamental. You need to read the five presidents'report Oggy. The unminuted Eurogroup meetings are central to the EU and the Euro is a central means of control..... cannot be allowed to fail. Don't forget it's the direction of travel that counts. When we joined the European Economic Community we were not made aware of Political union not a single currency. |
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Oct 2, 2018 11:36:26 GMT
A thought. Suppose there was a second ref with the questions: Remain, leave with a (Chequers?) deal, leave with no deal. The leave vote is split and Remain wins (that's what Remain want after all) The EU quite rightly say that having triggered A50 the UK can't assume the status that we had before. New terms of membership will have to be negotiated. Those terms of membership should surely then be put to a peoples vote to decide if acceptable, if not what then? It's a fair question - the wording of a second referendum would be very complicated. Personally I don't think it should have the remain option on it. I think people should be given an opportunity to show their opinion on how we leave the EU - in that sense it's a first referendum on the terms of leaving, and not a second referendum on whether we should leave. But how it works in practice is the sticking point, and I can't think of a situation that doesn't involve two votes. For example, a first vote on the Chequers deal - if that is rejected than a question between a 'no deal' Brexit and a softer Brexit. But this then throws up the problem of how you word a softer option. Probably it would have to be outlined that people are voting for a Norway/Switzerland-type deal, but even within that there has to be a bit of wiggle room for a British government to negotiate some caveats into the deal as we have different needs than Norway or Switzerland. My short answer to your question would be "fuck nows"  I think this could be a bigger minefield than the original in/out option to be honest. Playing Devil's Advocate for a moment suppose Ref2 went remain for reasons given above. Then suppose the EU offer a remain deal that is put before the UK electorate to decide on as I put above. Now fleshing out, totally hypothetical options, and without getting into the semantics of punishing the UK, the EU may want us to be 'more inclusive'. When do existing remain voters say no? E.g. the EU remain offers are: a) UK membership fee goes up to £20bn, no rebate b) Closer monetary union and adopt Euro within 5 years plus or not a) c) Closer fiscal union by accepting European central bank interest rates within 5 years plus or not a) or b) d) Closer political union effectively leaving UK Govt to hand out library fines and collect parking tickets plus or not etc etc. I'm not suggesting these options would be offered but striking a new remain deal may be more problematic that getting a leave deal! I'm with you either way, "dunner ask me"! |
|
|
|
Post by shangamuzo on Oct 2, 2018 12:21:17 GMT
I live in London. That should be fairly obvious from my reply to you I would have thought!? Confirmation is what I wanted. Are you a Stoke fan by any chance ? |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 2, 2018 12:52:40 GMT
I live in London. That should be fairly obvious from my reply to you I would have thought!? Confirmation is what I wanted. Are you a Stoke fan by any chance ? WTF!? Why would I be posting on a stoke forum if not!? Surely everyone is a stoke fan on here!? |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 2, 2018 12:54:47 GMT
If the Euro was fundamental to the EU, every nation in it would have to have it. But they don’t. Unlike respecting the four freedoms and rule of law and basic human rights. Those are all fundamental. You need to read the five presidents'report Oggy. The unminuted Eurogroup meetings are central to the EU and the Euro is a central means of control..... cannot be allowed to fail. Don't forget it's the direction of travel that counts. When we joined the European Economic Community we were not made aware of Political union not a single currency. Something cannot be accurately described as fundamental unless it is essential. The euro isn’t as the UK and 8 other nations prove. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 2, 2018 13:24:23 GMT
You need to read the five presidents'report Oggy. The unminuted Eurogroup meetings are central to the EU and the Euro is a central means of control..... cannot be allowed to fail. Don't forget it's the direction of travel that counts. When we joined the European Economic Community we were not made aware of Political union not a single currency. Something cannot be accurately described as fundamental unless it is essential. The euro isn’t as the UK and 8 other nations prove. We will have to disagree Oggy. The EU have made it clear that the currency is vitally important to the project...it cannot be allowed to fail |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 2, 2018 14:41:07 GMT
Something cannot be accurately described as fundamental unless it is essential. The euro isn’t as the UK and 8 other nations prove. We will have to disagree Oggy. The EU have made it clear that the currency is vitally important to the project...it cannot be allowed to fail I agree that they won’t allow the euro to fail. Would any nation, or group of nations that share a currency, allow it to “fail”!? Those in the EU but who do not have the euro are proof that having the euro is not fundamental to being a member of the eu. It is an example of the leave campaign’s project fear approach when people say otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by 3putts on Oct 2, 2018 16:08:28 GMT
As I say I am very pleased to disagree with you. But it is the EU that wants ever closer union towards political and economic union ( not my words) and that's the organisation that you are signing up to. Fundamental to that across Europe is the Euro ( amongst other things) Yeah, it's so fundamental that only two-thirds of the member states actually use the Euro. Delighted to disagree with you on this definition of 'fundamental'. I am no currency expert but what I do know from my travels is that the £ has never been so low. tories think this is a good thing as it means our exports are cheaper yes that is true but it also means imports are more expensive and seeing how we import more than we export doesn't that make us worse off? but what do I know im thick |
|
|
|
Post by skemstokie on Oct 2, 2018 16:09:09 GMT
interesting that Rip. Quite correct Relationships between the countries within the UK change as does the UKs relationship with the outside world.One important area of changeand one that the people of the UK are passionate about is self determination, sovereignty, devolved governments and independence. I think it is accepted that the UK is a country in which the main governance us ( or should be pending EU interference) the Westminster parliament. The EU isn't a country. Its an organisation that believes in and aims for Political and Economic union.....in other words;it does indeed aim to be a country....the United States of Europe. With "European" citizens and the diminidhing of national sovereignty. ( these are not my ideas but have clearly been stated in reports and in the EU parliament). So therein lies the issue. I don't want to belong to an organisation that wants political and economic union ( as the EU clearly says it aims for) for the whole of Europe. I want the UK to take back its sovereignty. If the individual countries within the UK wish to become independent, so he it and good luck to them . You it seems clearly want to belong to the EU.....so therefore want Political and Economic union......thats what tge EU is about ( it says so). It isn't a trading bloc. The Euro is fundamental to the political and economic control ( 5 Presidents report), I don't know why you don't simply argue to join.... believe in the EU. And if we don't understand each other, I'm quite happy with that. For me our positions are clear The Euro can't be that fundamental, as they were happy for us and nearly a quarter of the countries of the EU not to join. If it was fundamental, they would've insisted. The rest of it is you projecting when you think is my opinion - despite me clearly stating I think we are better out of the Euro you seem to think I am arguing to be a part of it. I believe a vote to Remain was to keep what we had - which was a unique position in the EU. That is in the EU but out of the Euro and Schengen. Given we've not been close to joining either despite the fact that they've been around since 1984 and 2002 respectively, your 'ever closer union' is either happening a) without the UK (which it will of course after Brexit has been delivered in March) or b) at glacial speed. Your idea that a vote for Remain was a vote for the Euro or complete integration is laughable, but in line with the complete redefinition of the options on offer back in 2016. A vote to Leave was apparently a vote to not just leave the EU (which we are doing but apparently doesn't fulfill the definition of 'Leave') but to leave the EU in a very specific manner (despite this not being written on the ballot), and now a vote to Remain was a vote to join the Euro, dissolve the House of Commons and drive on the 'wrong' side of the road (OK, I added the last one in myself). Remind me again who is delivering Project Fear here? Well put,but as they say "you can lead the man to wisdom but you can`t make him think" i had a similar exchange but gave him up as a lost cause  |
|
|
|
Post by skemstokie on Oct 2, 2018 16:13:38 GMT
Yeah, it's so fundamental that only two-thirds of the member states actually use the Euro. Delighted to disagree with you on this definition of 'fundamental'. I am no currency expert but what I do know from my travels is that the £ has never been so low. tories think this is a good thing as it means our exports are cheaper yes that is true but it also means imports are more expensive and seeing how we import more than we export doesn't that make us worse off? but what do I know im thick I would say you are anything but thick,you have worked out what Brexiters have not comprehended for over 2 years |
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Oct 2, 2018 16:20:32 GMT
I am no currency expert but what I do know from my travels is that the £ has never been so low. tories think this is a good thing as it means our exports are cheaper yes that is true but it also means imports are more expensive and seeing how we import more than we export doesn't that make us worse off? but what do I know im thick I would say you are anything but thick,you have worked out what Brexiters have not comprehended for over 2 years Excellent you have worked out currency movements now apply that to tariffs and see why brexiters comprehended this well before you and that is way any deal with EU will be tariff free. |
|
|
|
Post by skemstokie on Oct 2, 2018 16:37:06 GMT
Can you explain what you brexiters worked out about tariffs? we already HAVE a tariff free deal which is working well,the £ falling by at least 12% making imports dearer for the U.K is the price we are paying add to that exports may have risen but in real terms we receive less in foreign currency due to poor exchange rates and you think this is advantages?
|
|
