Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on Jan 24, 2019 1:36:35 GMT
As I have said before ALL on here are the lucky ones. Just look at "can't pay we'll take it away" There are many who live from day to day and don't have the luxury of being able to moan at a poor return on their extra wealth. I worked hard for 42 years and was aware that saving if possible was prudent. I am aware every day of how lucky I am. There is nothing wrong with making money either by investing or by working each has its merits. Investing usually comes after years of work. A bit like voting Labour the older you get the more you realise it is not the prudent thing to do at the same time you realise investing can bring benefits Yes, I largely agree with you. I wasn't in any way attempting sarcasm in my previous reply. Didn't think you were. You are rarely subtle when you disagree with me (All part of the fun. Good debate)
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Jan 24, 2019 9:43:28 GMT
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Jan 24, 2019 10:59:01 GMT
"Remain-supporting MPs have been forced to abandon proposals which could have brought about a second referendum, as they accused Jeremy Corbyn of defying wishes of Labour voters. In a withering attack on the Labour leader, prominent MPs Chuka Umunna, Luciana Berger and Tory MP Sarah Wollaston said that he had failed to "fulfil his promise" to party members. The MPs said it was with "great regret" that they would not be laying an amendment in next week's crunch vote because it would not pass without his backing."
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,527
Likes: 6,322
|
Post by registerme on Jan 24, 2019 11:27:21 GMT
Interesting read, thanks for the link. I came to a different conclusion to you. My interpretation of that piece is that "yes, a hard border will be required (in the event of a no deal Brexit...)".
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Jan 24, 2019 11:41:52 GMT
Interesting read, thanks for the link. I came to a different conclusion to you. My interpretation of that piece is that "yes, a hard border will be required (in the event of a no deal Brexit...)". Only if another state were to make a formal complaint - which would be a risky move by any such state for obvious reasons and therefore inherently unlikely. AND by which point a deal will be done anyway as pragmatism always wins the day. I dont think anyone that advocates "no deal" believes there would never be a deal - just that no deal is the starting point for a "fair" deal.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Jan 24, 2019 11:47:56 GMT
I dont think anyone that advocates "no deal" believes there would never be a deal - just that no deal is the starting point for a "fair" deal. I sort of agree with this, kind of like falling down the stairs and breaking your leg is a good starting point for people to focus on your recovery.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,527
Likes: 6,322
|
Post by registerme on Jan 24, 2019 11:53:06 GMT
Interesting read, thanks for the link. I came to a different conclusion to you. My interpretation of that piece is that "yes, a hard border will be required (in the event of a no deal Brexit...)". Only if another state were to make a formal complaint - which would be a risky move by any such state for obvious reasons and therefore inherently unlikely. AND by which point a deal will be done anyway as pragmatism always wins the day. I dont think anyone that advocates "no deal" believes there would never be a deal - just that no deal is the starting point for a "fair" deal. Yeah, but that's the WTO's stance. I don't see how the EU can have a stance other than "there need to be customs checks, and that equates to a hard border", quickly followed up by "but you promised you wouldn't do that".
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Jan 24, 2019 11:55:20 GMT
I dont think anyone that advocates "no deal" believes there would never be a deal - just that no deal is the starting point for a "fair" deal. I sort of agree with this, kind of like falling down the stairs and breaking your leg is a good starting point for people to focus on your recovery. How witty - spare me please
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Jan 24, 2019 12:00:17 GMT
Only if another state were to make a formal complaint - which would be a risky move by any such state for obvious reasons and therefore inherently unlikely. AND by which point a deal will be done anyway as pragmatism always wins the day. I dont think anyone that advocates "no deal" believes there would never be a deal - just that no deal is the starting point for a "fair" deal. Yeah, but that's the WTO's stance. I don't see how the EU can have a stance other than "there need to be customs checks, and that equates to a hard border", quickly followed up by "but you promised you wouldn't do that". Why "must" there be customs checks when there will be no people checks?
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,527
Likes: 6,322
|
Post by registerme on Jan 24, 2019 12:06:11 GMT
Why "must" there be customs checks when there will be no people checks? I think (and am happy to be corrected) it's because the EU needs to guarantee / maintain the integrity of the single market, and it cannot do that if there is a porous border that allows unfettered trade / transfer of goods across it. To use the (slightly ridiculous imho) example from that piece you linked in the Irish Times - say the UK imports Brazilian beef at zero tariff rates, what is then to prevent that beef being re-exported to the EU, across the Irish border, subverting / evading whatever EU tariffs may be in place on Brazilian beef?
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Jan 24, 2019 12:24:22 GMT
Why "must" there be customs checks when there will be no people checks? I think (and am happy to be corrected) it's because the EU needs to guarantee / maintain the integrity of the single market, and it cannot do that if there is a porous border that allows unfettered trade / transfer of goods across it. To use the (slightly ridiculous imho) example from that piece you linked in the Irish Times - say the UK imports Brazilian beef at zero tariff rates, what is then to prevent that beef being re-exported to the EU, across the Irish border, subverting / evading whatever EU tariffs may be in place on Brazilian beef? But dont they also need to protect the integrity of freedom of movement? How are they going to do that as that is assured isn't it? I would suggest they go hand in hand.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,527
Likes: 6,322
|
Post by registerme on Jan 24, 2019 12:35:23 GMT
Yes, how indeed? Essentially the UK and the EU find themselves in a position where there has to be a hard border but they've agree that there can't be a hard border.
The UK said "don't worry we'll sort it" (remember BoJo's slightly whimsical promise that technology would come to the rescue?). The EU said "hhmmm, not sure we have too much faith in that". Hence the backstop.
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Jan 24, 2019 13:00:02 GMT
Yes, how indeed? Essentially the UK and the EU find themselves in a position where there has to be a hard border but they've agree that there can't be a hard border. The UK said "don't worry we'll sort it" (remember BoJo's slightly whimsical promise that technology would come to the rescue?). The EU said "hhmmm, not sure we have too much faith in that". Hence the backstop. OR - maybe Ireland can just reunite! And take Scotland with them (said in jest, so no bomb threats please)
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Jan 24, 2019 14:01:23 GMT
Why "must" there be customs checks when there will be no people checks? I think (and am happy to be corrected) it's because the EU needs to guarantee / maintain the integrity of the single market, and it cannot do that if there is a porous border that allows unfettered trade / transfer of goods across it. To use the (slightly ridiculous imho) example from that piece you linked in the Irish Times - say the UK imports Brazilian beef at zero tariff rates, what is then to prevent that beef being re-exported to the EU, across the Irish border, subverting / evading whatever EU tariffs may be in place on Brazilian beef? I crossed one of the land borders from Ukraine to Poland (on a bus) a little while ago. They checked everyone's passports of course, but custom officials made a big point of asking whether anyone was taking the chance to bring across a few kilos of meat. Struck me as odd as at the time. No meat in my luggage, just a bit of Nemoff Honey Pepper vodka It took 2 hours btw to get through, and that was a good day apparently
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Jan 24, 2019 14:09:22 GMT
Yes, how indeed? Essentially the UK and the EU find themselves in a position where there has to be a hard border but they've agree that there can't be a hard border. The UK said "don't worry we'll sort it" (remember BoJo's slightly whimsical promise that technology would come to the rescue?). The EU said "hhmmm, not sure we have too much faith in that". Hence the backstop. "If you'd like to push me and speculate on what might happen in a no-deal scenario in Ireland, I think it's pretty obvious – you will have a hard border”, said Margaritis Schinas, the EU Chief Spokesperson on Tuesday, causing shock in the Republic, where there has been blind faith that the British government would inevitably be forced to accept the backstop. Ireland would not accept a hard border and therefore wouldn’t plan for one was the mantra the Government continued to repeat, but as the day went on, the floundering Taoiseach Leo Varadkar was forced to admit that in the case of a no-deal outcome, the British and Irish governments “would have to negotiate an agreement on customs and regulations that would mean full alignment so there would be no hard border.” Varadkar hasn’t suddenly joined the European Research Group, but he’s had an unpleasant bucketload of reality dump on him
----------
I always thought, when Varadkar was spouting his hard-ass lines about what the UK should/shouldn't do, that it could come back to bite Ireland if the UK went out without a deal.
|
|