Discussion:
Loving this talk about No Deal
(too old to reply)
James Harris
2017-10-11 12:12:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not because
I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.

But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least it
is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been
treated to hitherto.

Hooray!

--
James Harris
abelard
2017-10-11 12:16:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 13:12:31 +0100, James Harris
<***@gmail.com> wrote:

>I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not because
>I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>
>But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least it
>is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been
>treated to hitherto.
>
>Hooray!

good to see theresa upping her game while watching
gerry and his whiners squirming....


--
www.abelard.org
b***@once.me
2017-10-12 10:24:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 14:16:18 +0200, abelard wrote:

> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 13:12:31 +0100, James Harris
> <***@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not because
>>I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>
>>But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>>in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least it
>>is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been
>>treated to hitherto.
>>
>>Hooray!
>
> good to see theresa upping her game while watching
> gerry and his whiners squirming....


Gerry and his delaymakers.
Phi
2017-10-11 13:21:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not because I
> want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>
> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism in
> what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least it is
> being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been treated
> to hitherto.
>
> Hooray!
>
> --
> James Harris
>

Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem with
borders with Sweden and Finland.
The Todal
2017-10-11 15:34:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>
> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>
>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least
>> it is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have
>> been treated to hitherto.
>>
>> Hooray!
>>
>> --
>> James Harris
>>
>
> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem
> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>

Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
bankrupcy for our nation.
abelard
2017-10-11 15:36:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 16:34:26 +0100, The Todal <***@icloud.com>
wrote:

>On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>
>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>>
>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least
>>> it is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have
>>> been treated to hitherto.
>>>
>>> Hooray!
>>>
>>> --
>>> James Harris
>>>
>>
>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem
>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>
>
>Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>bankrupcy for our nation.

yeah, and there's a meteor approaching fast....

we're all do-o-o--o-o-o--o--o-m-m-m-e-d-d-d


--
www.abelard.org
Incubus
2017-10-11 16:05:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 11/10/2017 16:34, The Todal wrote:
> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>
>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic
>>> streak.
>>>
>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for
>>> pragmatism in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal
>>> but at least it is being discussed more realistically than the
>>> hysterics we have been treated to hitherto.
>>>
>>> Hooray!
>>>
>>> --
>>> James Harris
>>>
>>
>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a
>> problem with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>
>
> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
> bankrupcy for our nation.

How is it the case that we will be virtually bankrupt?
tim...
2017-10-11 16:26:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"The Todal" <***@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:***@mid.individual.net...
> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>
>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not because
>>> I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>>
>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least it
>>> is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been
>>> treated to hitherto.
>>>
>>> Hooray!
>>>
>>> --
>>> James Harris
>>>
>>
>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem
>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>
>
> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
> bankrupcy for our nation.

what nonsense
Judith
2017-10-13 01:42:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:26:43 +0100, "tim..." <***@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>
>"The Todal" <***@icloud.com> wrote in message
>news:***@mid.individual.net...
>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>
>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not because
>>>> I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>>>
>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least it
>>>> is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been
>>>> treated to hitherto.
>>>>
>>>> Hooray!
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> James Harris
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem
>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>
>>
>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>
>what nonsense


While a cliff-edge Brexit would imply customs checks, tariffs and regulatory
barriers between the UK and the EU, with a premature Brexit none of the
necessary infrastructure would be in place, causing chaos at ports. Complex
cross-border supply chains would be interrupted. Drugs developed in the UK
would not have their approval recognised in other member states, and clinical
trials would be disrupted.

It gets worse. Air transport is not covered by the WTO, so there are no rules
to fall back on. And airlines need to arrange their schedules a year in
advance. It is conceivable that, following a chaotic Brexit, planes to and from
the UK would cease to fly, if only because the lawyers would caution them
against doing so.

The political implications of a hard border in Northern Ireland — which a
chaotic Brexit would make inevitable — hardly need spelling out. Even the talk
of no deal has destabilised the province, in the context of simmering tensions
over the breakdown of power sharing.

The economic implications would also be severe. The highly integrated agri-food
business would be severely disrupted. Indeed agriculture throughout the country
would be affected. We expect major retailers to have contingency plans, so we
would not anticipate food shortages. However, a chaotic Brexit would make the
task of separating our WTO entitlements and obligations from those of the EU
much harder, particularly if talks broke down acrimoniously.

http://ukandeu.ac.uk/no-deal-will-bring-a-chaotic-brexit-to-the-fore/

HTH
Yellow
2017-10-13 02:07:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 02:42:21 +0100, Judith <***@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:26:43 +0100, "tim..." <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >"The Todal" <***@icloud.com> wrote in message
> >news:***@mid.individual.net...
> >> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
> >>>
> >>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
> >>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not because
> >>>> I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
> >>>>
> >>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
> >>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
> >>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
> >>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least it
> >>>> is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been
> >>>> treated to hitherto.
> >>>>
> >>>> Hooray!
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> James Harris
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem
> >>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
> >> bankrupcy for our nation.
> >
> >what nonsense
>
>
> While a cliff-edge Brexit would imply customs checks, tariffs and regulatory
> barriers between the UK and the EU, with a premature Brexit none of the
> necessary infrastructure would be in place, causing chaos at ports. Complex
> cross-border supply chains would be interrupted. Drugs developed in the UK
> would not have their approval recognised in other member states, and clinical
> trials would be disrupted.
>
> It gets worse. Air transport is not covered by the WTO, so there are no rules
> to fall back on. And airlines need to arrange their schedules a year in
> advance. It is conceivable that, following a chaotic Brexit, planes to and from
> the UK would cease to fly, if only because the lawyers would caution them
> against doing so.
>
> The political implications of a hard border in Northern Ireland ? which a
> chaotic Brexit would make inevitable ? hardly need spelling out. Even the talk
> of no deal has destabilised the province, in the context of simmering tensions
> over the breakdown of power sharing.

NI haven't got a government at the moment to destabilise. Been since
January hasn't it?


> The economic implications would also be severe. The highly integrated agri-food
> business would be severely disrupted. Indeed agriculture throughout the country
> would be affected. We expect major retailers to have contingency plans, so we
> would not anticipate food shortages. However, a chaotic Brexit would make the
> task of separating our WTO entitlements and obligations from those of the EU
> much harder, particularly if talks broke down acrimoniously.
>
> http://ukandeu.ac.uk/no-deal-will-bring-a-chaotic-brexit-to-the-fore/
>
> HTH

And there would be equal chaos in the EU. I don't wish anyone any harm,
but it would be quite interesting simply to let it all play out, to see
who blinks first.
James Harris
2017-10-13 05:49:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13/10/2017 02:42, Judith wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:26:43 +0100, "tim..." <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> "The Todal" <***@icloud.com> wrote in message
>> news:***@mid.individual.net...
>>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not because
>>>>> I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>>>>
>>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least it
>>>>> is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been
>>>>> treated to hitherto.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hooray!
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> James Harris
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem
>>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>>
>> what nonsense
>
>
> While a cliff-edge Brexit would imply customs checks, tariffs and regulatory
> barriers between the UK and the EU, with a premature Brexit none of the
> necessary infrastructure would be in place, causing chaos at ports. Complex
> cross-border supply chains would be interrupted. Drugs developed in the UK
> would not have their approval recognised in other member states, and clinical
> trials would be disrupted.

I assuming by "cliff edge" you mean a sudden change. Customs checks and
tariffs would apply under WTO even without a cliff edge. But,
surprisingly, the infrastructure doesn't need to be in place from day 1.
Because UK customs examine selected shipments only they are able to
start small and ramp up as time goes on. That's not desirable, of
course, but it can be done (according to HMRC officials' evidence to a
select committee).

What EU customs people do on the other side, however, is outside our
control. If they got nasty....

>
> It gets worse. Air transport is not covered by the WTO, so there are no rules
> to fall back on. And airlines need to arrange their schedules a year in
> advance. It is conceivable that, following a chaotic Brexit, planes to and from
> the UK would cease to fly, if only because the lawyers would caution them
> against doing so.

Only feasible if the EU side is deliberately obstructive. They could be.

>
> The political implications of a hard border in Northern Ireland — which a
> chaotic Brexit would make inevitable — hardly need spelling out. Even the talk
> of no deal has destabilised the province, in the context of simmering tensions
> over the breakdown of power sharing.

I believe that's untrue. Ireland's internal border can remain as it is.
So far, it is only the EU side which is complaining about leaving it open.

>
> The economic implications would also be severe. The highly integrated agri-food
> business would be severely disrupted. Indeed agriculture throughout the country
> would be affected. We expect major retailers to have contingency plans, so we
> would not anticipate food shortages. However, a chaotic Brexit would make the
> task of separating our WTO entitlements and obligations from those of the EU
> much harder, particularly if talks broke down acrimoniously.
>
> http://ukandeu.ac.uk/no-deal-will-bring-a-chaotic-brexit-to-the-fore/

If talks broke down acrimoniously then I agree that bad things could
happen. With a civil-natured breakup the WTO option is not too bad.


--
James Harris
tim...
2017-10-13 08:58:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:orpk4i$804$***@dont-email.me...

> If talks broke down acrimoniously then I agree that bad things could
> happen. With a civil-natured breakup the WTO option is not too bad.

and good luck with them getting our help when the Ruskies invade Lithuania,
if they do go out of they way to be deliberately obstructive

tim
Dan S. MacAbre
2017-10-13 09:07:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
tim... wrote:
>
>
> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:orpk4i$804$***@dont-email.me...
>
>> If talks broke down acrimoniously then I agree that bad things could
>> happen. With a civil-natured breakup the WTO option is not too bad.
>
> and good luck with them getting our help when the Ruskies invade
> Lithuania, if they do go out of they way to be deliberately obstructive
>
> tim
>

I think they all love that Russian gas too much to be bothered about
that :-)
Norman Wells
2017-10-13 09:08:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13/10/2017 09:58, tim... wrote:
>
> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:orpk4i$804$***@dont-email.me...
>
>> If talks broke down acrimoniously then I agree that bad things could
>> happen. With a civil-natured breakup the WTO option is not too bad.
>
> and good luck with them getting our help when the Ruskies invade
> Lithuania, if they do go out of they way to be deliberately obstructive

I think you'll find that's a NATO thing, unconnected with the EU.

And as far as I know we're not pulling out of NATO.
tim...
2017-10-13 12:43:56 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Norman Wells" <***@unseen.ac.am> wrote in message
news:***@mid.individual.net...
> On 13/10/2017 09:58, tim... wrote:
>>
>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:orpk4i$804$***@dont-email.me...
>>
>>> If talks broke down acrimoniously then I agree that bad things could
>>> happen. With a civil-natured breakup the WTO option is not too bad.
>>
>> and good luck with them getting our help when the Ruskies invade
>> Lithuania, if they do go out of they way to be deliberately obstructive
>
> I think you'll find that's a NATO thing, unconnected with the EU.

maybe it is

but that hasn't stopped other member countries in the past not committing
their troops (in their relative numbers) to every NATO operation, for some
spurious reason.

it is, in fact commonplace

tim
James Hammerton
2017-10-13 18:30:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13/10/2017 06:49, James Harris wrote:
> On 13/10/2017 02:42, Judith wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:26:43 +0100, "tim..." <***@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "The Todal" <***@icloud.com> wrote in message
>>> news:***@mid.individual.net...
>>>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>>>> because
>>>>>> I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for
>>>>>> pragmatism
>>>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at
>>>>>> least it
>>>>>> is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been
>>>>>> treated to hitherto.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hooray!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> James Harris
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a
>>>>> problem
>>>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>>>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>>>
>>> what nonsense
>>
>>
>> While a cliff-edge Brexit would imply customs checks, tariffs and
>> regulatory
>> barriers between the UK and the EU, with a premature Brexit none of the
>> necessary infrastructure would be in place, causing chaos at ports.
>> Complex
>> cross-border supply chains would be interrupted. Drugs developed in
>> the UK
>> would not have their approval recognised in other member states, and
>> clinical
>> trials would be disrupted.
>
> I assuming by "cliff edge" you mean a sudden change. Customs checks and
> tariffs would apply under WTO even without a cliff edge. But,
> surprisingly, the infrastructure doesn't need to be in place from day 1.
> Because UK customs examine selected shipments only they are able to
> start small and ramp up as time goes on. That's not desirable, of
> course, but it can be done (according to HMRC officials' evidence to a
> select committee).
>
> What EU customs people do on the other side, however, is outside our
> control. If they got nasty....

Depends to what extent sticking to the letter of EU law might be
considered nasty.

We currently export freely to EU member states because we are an EU
member state. At some time after we leave the EU (probably not long
after our last day as EU members ends), we'll no longer be listed as an
EU member state on the relevant databases.

As a third country we need to apply for permission to export to the EU
before our businesses can apply (and do so in each of dozens of
categories of products). Then our businesses need to apply for
permission to do so as well (plus they need to perform appropriate
paperwork for each consignment once the permission is granted). Without
these permissions our goods can't enter the EU. That is the law.

I've seen it argued this is all computerised so that e.g. when our goods
enter other EU countries a simple check of the digital manifest is made
and the goods can then continue, but if the digital manifest says the
goods are from a third country that hasn't got pernission (the state of
the UK after Brexit if there's literally no deal/no preparation) then we
have a 'computer says no' situation and the goods will be blocked.

This is the sort of situation that an agreement (e.g. to transfer us and
our existing EU exporting businesses onto the relevant third country
lists) with the EU would ensure we avoided , and which we risk under
the literally 'no deal' scenario.

>
>>
>> It gets worse. Air transport is not covered by the WTO, so there are
>> no rules
>> to fall back on. And airlines need to arrange their schedules a year in
>> advance. It is conceivable that, following a chaotic Brexit, planes to
>> and from
>> the UK would cease to fly, if only because the lawyers would caution them
>> against doing so.
>
> Only feasible if the EU side is deliberately obstructive. They could be.
>
>>
>> The political implications of a hard border in Northern Ireland — which a
>> chaotic Brexit would make inevitable — hardly need spelling out. Even
>> the talk
>> of no deal has destabilised the province, in the context of simmering
>> tensions
>> over the breakdown of power sharing.
>
> I believe that's untrue. Ireland's internal border can remain as it is.
> So far, it is only the EU side which is complaining about leaving it open.

WTO rules require the EU to treat all third countries the same regarding
trade matters (except where treaties may allow for removal of barriers).
So e.g. if the US has to jump through certain hoops to export to the EU,
so will the UK, including NI.

If the EU allow goods to flow freely from NI across the EU's new land
border with the UK in Ireland, in the absence of an agreement, it may
result in complaints from other third countries who have to jump through
the hoops...

>
>>
>> The economic implications would also be severe. The highly integrated
>> agri-food
>> business would be severely disrupted. Indeed agriculture throughout
>> the country
>> would be affected. We expect major retailers to have contingency
>> plans, so we
>> would not anticipate food shortages. However, a chaotic Brexit would
>> make the
>> task of separating our WTO entitlements and obligations from those of
>> the EU
>> much harder, particularly if talks broke down acrimoniously.
>>
>> http://ukandeu.ac.uk/no-deal-will-bring-a-chaotic-brexit-to-the-fore/
>
> If talks broke down acrimoniously then I agree that bad things could
> happen. With a civil-natured breakup the WTO option is not too bad.
>
>

Regards,

James

--
James Hammerton
http://jhammerton.wordpress.com
http://www.magnacartaplus.com/
James Harris
2017-10-13 20:32:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 13/10/2017 19:30, James Hammerton wrote:
> On 13/10/2017 06:49, James Harris wrote:
>> On 13/10/2017 02:42, Judith wrote:
>>> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:26:43 +0100, "tim..." <***@yahoo.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "The Todal" <***@icloud.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:***@mid.individual.net...
>>>>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>> I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for
>>>>>>> pragmatism
>>>>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at
>>>>>>> least it
>>>>>>> is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been
>>>>>>> treated to hitherto.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hooray!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> James Harris
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a
>>>>>> problem
>>>>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>>>>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>>>>
>>>> what nonsense
>>>
>>>
>>> While a cliff-edge Brexit would imply customs checks, tariffs and
>>> regulatory
>>> barriers between the UK and the EU, with a premature Brexit none of the
>>> necessary infrastructure would be in place, causing chaos at ports.
>>> Complex
>>> cross-border supply chains would be interrupted. Drugs developed in
>>> the UK
>>> would not have their approval recognised in other member states, and
>>> clinical
>>> trials would be disrupted.
>>
>> I assuming by "cliff edge" you mean a sudden change. Customs checks and
>> tariffs would apply under WTO even without a cliff edge. But,
>> surprisingly, the infrastructure doesn't need to be in place from day 1.
>> Because UK customs examine selected shipments only they are able to
>> start small and ramp up as time goes on. That's not desirable, of
>> course, but it can be done (according to HMRC officials' evidence to a
>> select committee).
>>
>> What EU customs people do on the other side, however, is outside our
>> control. If they got nasty....
>
> Depends to what extent sticking to the letter of EU law might be
> considered nasty.

I get the impression that the EU reverts to EU law only when it wants
to. It could choose to be nasty if talks break down acrimoniously.

>
> We currently export freely to EU member states because we are an EU
> member state. At some time after we leave the EU (probably not long
> after our last day as EU members ends), we'll no longer be listed as an
> EU member state on the relevant databases.
>
> As a third country we need to apply for permission to export to the EU
> before our businesses can apply (and do so in each of dozens of
> categories of products). Then our businesses need to apply for
> permission to do so as well (plus they need to perform appropriate
> paperwork for each consignment once the permission is granted). Without
> these permissions our goods can't enter the EU. That is the law.
>
> I've seen it argued this is all computerised so that e.g. when our goods
> enter other EU countries a simple check of the digital manifest is made
> and the goods can then continue, but if the digital manifest says the
> goods are from a third country that hasn't got pernission (the state of
> the UK after Brexit if there's literally no deal/no preparation) then we
> have a 'computer says no' situation and the goods will be blocked.
>
> This is the sort of situation that an agreement (e.g. to transfer us and
> our existing EU exporting businesses onto the relevant third country
> lists) with the EU would ensure we avoided , and which we risk under
> the literally 'no deal' scenario.

To be clear, IMO the "literally no deal" scenario would be disastrous.
There really would be no cross-border trade, no cross-border flights and
so on. But I am working on the assumption that "no trade deal" is much
more positive.

>
>>
>>>
>>> It gets worse. Air transport is not covered by the WTO, so there are
>>> no rules
>>> to fall back on. And airlines need to arrange their schedules a year in
>>> advance. It is conceivable that, following a chaotic Brexit, planes to
>>> and from
>>> the UK would cease to fly, if only because the lawyers would caution them
>>> against doing so.
>>
>> Only feasible if the EU side is deliberately obstructive. They could be.
>>
>>>
>>> The political implications of a hard border in Northern Ireland — which a
>>> chaotic Brexit would make inevitable — hardly need spelling out. Even
>>> the talk
>>> of no deal has destabilised the province, in the context of simmering
>>> tensions
>>> over the breakdown of power sharing.
>>
>> I believe that's untrue. Ireland's internal border can remain as it is.
>> So far, it is only the EU side which is complaining about leaving it open.
>
> WTO rules require the EU to treat all third countries the same regarding
> trade matters (except where treaties may allow for removal of barriers).
> So e.g. if the US has to jump through certain hoops to export to the EU,
> so will the UK, including NI.
>
> If the EU allow goods to flow freely from NI across the EU's new land
> border with the UK in Ireland, in the absence of an agreement, it may
> result in complaints from other third countries who have to jump through
> the hoops...

Good point.


--
James Harris
Ned Latham
2017-10-14 03:06:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 13 Oct 2017 21:32:02 +0100, James Harris wrote:

> On 13/10/2017 19:30, James Hammerton wrote:
>> On 13/10/2017 06:49, James Harris wrote:
>>> On 13/10/2017 02:42, Judith wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:26:43 +0100, "tim..."
>>>> <***@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "The Todal" <***@icloud.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:***@mid.individual.net...
>>>>>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>>>>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic
>>>>>>>> streak.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being
>>>>>>>> discussed without the political equivalent of people running
>>>>>>>> around in a panic screaming about the end being nigh. There is
>>>>>>>> still room for pragmatism in what the public are being told to
>>>>>>>> expect from No Deal but at least it is being discussed more
>>>>>>>> realistically than the hysterics we have been treated to
>>>>>>>> hitherto.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hooray!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> James Harris
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a
>>>>>>> problem with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>>>>>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>>>>>
>>>>> what nonsense
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> While a cliff-edge Brexit would imply customs checks, tariffs and
>>>> regulatory barriers between the UK and the EU, with a premature
>>>> Brexit none of the necessary infrastructure would be in place,
>>>> causing chaos at ports. Complex cross-border supply chains would be
>>>> interrupted. Drugs developed in the UK would not have their approval
>>>> recognised in other member states, and clinical trials would be
>>>> disrupted.
>>>
>>> I assuming by "cliff edge" you mean a sudden change. Customs checks
>>> and tariffs would apply under WTO even without a cliff edge. But,
>>> surprisingly, the infrastructure doesn't need to be in place from day
>>> 1. Because UK customs examine selected shipments only they are able to
>>> start small and ramp up as time goes on. That's not desirable, of
>>> course, but it can be done (according to HMRC officials' evidence to a
>>> select committee).
>>>
>>> What EU customs people do on the other side, however, is outside our
>>> control. If they got nasty....
>>
>> Depends to what extent sticking to the letter of EU law might be
>> considered nasty.
>
> I get the impression that the EU reverts to EU law only when it wants
> to. It could choose to be nasty if talks break down acrimoniously.

Pay back is a bitch!

>> We currently export freely to EU member states because we are an EU
>> member state. At some time after we leave the EU (probably not long
>> after our last day as EU members ends), we'll no longer be listed as an
>> EU member state on the relevant databases.
>>
>> As a third country we need to apply for permission to export to the EU
>> before our businesses can apply (and do so in each of dozens of
>> categories of products). Then our businesses need to apply for
>> permission to do so as well (plus they need to perform appropriate
>> paperwork for each consignment once the permission is granted). Without
>> these permissions our goods can't enter the EU. That is the law.
>>
>> I've seen it argued this is all computerised so that e.g. when our
>> goods enter other EU countries a simple check of the digital manifest
>> is made and the goods can then continue, but if the digital manifest
>> says the goods are from a third country that hasn't got pernission (the
>> state of the UK after Brexit if there's literally no deal/no
>> preparation) then we have a 'computer says no' situation and the goods
>> will be blocked.
>>
>> This is the sort of situation that an agreement (e.g. to transfer us
>> and our existing EU exporting businesses onto the relevant third
>> country lists) with the EU would ensure we avoided , and which we risk
>> under the literally 'no deal' scenario.
>
> To be clear, IMO the "literally no deal" scenario would be disastrous.
> There really would be no cross-border trade, no cross-border flights and
> so on. But I am working on the assumption that "no trade deal" is much
> more positive.

Indeed!
Definitely this will be the case for a number of EU member states. On the
other hand the UK will be sorry. Bring it on!

>>
>>>
>>>> It gets worse. Air transport is not covered by the WTO, so there are
>>>> no rules to fall back on. And airlines need to arrange their
>>>> schedules a year in advance. It is conceivable that, following a
>>>> chaotic Brexit, planes to and from the UK would cease to fly, if only
>>>> because the lawyers would caution them against doing so.
>>>
>>> Only feasible if the EU side is deliberately obstructive. They could
>>> be.

I certainly hope so!

>>>
>>>> The political implications of a hard border in Northern Ireland —
>>>> which a chaotic Brexit would make inevitable — hardly need spelling
>>>> out. Even the talk of no deal has destabilised the province, in the
>>>> context of simmering tensions over the breakdown of power sharing.
>>>
>>> I believe that's untrue. Ireland's internal border can remain as it
>>> is. So far, it is only the EU side which is complaining about leaving
>>> it open.
>>
>> WTO rules require the EU to treat all third countries the same
>> regarding trade matters (except where treaties may allow for removal of
>> barriers).
>> So e.g. if the US has to jump through certain hoops to export to the
>> EU,
>> so will the UK, including NI.

So what is the downside for the EU in that?

>> If the EU allow goods to flow freely from NI across the EU's new land
>> border with the UK in Ireland, in the absence of an agreement, it may
>> result in complaints from other third countries who have to jump
>> through the hoops...
>
> Good point.
Ned Latham
2017-10-14 03:34:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Not Ned Latham, nut tne ugly sow's lapdog, aka the Foreskin Peeler
(you know, the cowardly retard that sometimes calls itself "Ördög")
spewed forth its usual obsessive ranting impersonation...
> James Harris wrote:
> > James Hammerton wrote:
> > > James Harris wrote:
> > > >
> > > > What EU customs people do on the other side, however, is outside our
> > > > control. If they got nasty....
> > >
> > > Depends to what extent sticking to the letter of EU law might be
> > > considered nasty.
> >
> > I get the impression that the EU reverts to EU law only when it wants
> > to. It could choose to be nasty if talks break down acrimoniously.
>
> Pay back is a bitch!

That's "payback", moron.

----snip----

> > To be clear, IMO the "literally no deal" scenario would be disastrous.

Maybe not. Unless the EU cabal get their shit together, the Union will
disintegrate. The UK, will in that event be seen by many countries, if
it wishes to take up the role, as a leader in the reorganisation of
Europe on an equitable basis.

> > There really would be no cross-border trade, no cross-border flights and
> > so on. But I am working on the assumption that "no trade deal" is much
> > more positive.
>
> Indeed!
> Definitely this will be the case for a number of EU member states.
> On the other hand the UK will be sorry. Bring it on!

You forget the strength of the British economy and the quality of
British design and engineering. but then you're a retarded East
European immigrant who knows nothing of the English-speaking
world.

----snip----

> > > WTO rules require the EU to treat all third countries the same
> > > regarding trade matters (except where treaties may allow for removal of
> > > barriers).
> > > So e.g. if the US has to jump through certain hoops to export to the
> > > EU,
> > > so will the UK, including NI.
>
> So what is the downside for the EU in that?

It limits their "nastiness" options, moron.

----snip----
tim...
2017-10-13 08:55:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Judith" <***@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:***@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:26:43 +0100, "tim..." <***@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"The Todal" <***@icloud.com> wrote in message
>>news:***@mid.individual.net...
>>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>>> because
>>>>> I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>>>>
>>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least
>>>>> it
>>>>> is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been
>>>>> treated to hitherto.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hooray!
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> James Harris
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem
>>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>>
>>what nonsense
>
>
> While a cliff-edge Brexit would imply customs checks, tariffs and
> regulatory
> barriers between the UK and the EU, with a premature Brexit none of the
> necessary infrastructure would be in place, causing chaos at ports.
> Complex
> cross-border supply chains would be interrupted. Drugs developed in the UK
> would not have their approval recognised in other member states, and
> clinical
> trials would be disrupted.
>
> It gets worse. Air transport is not covered by the WTO, so there are no
> rules
> to fall back on. And airlines need to arrange their schedules a year in
> advance. It is conceivable that, following a chaotic Brexit, planes to and
> from
> the UK would cease to fly, if only because the lawyers would caution them
> against doing so.
>
> The political implications of a hard border in Northern Ireland - which a
> chaotic Brexit would make inevitable - hardly need spelling out. Even the
> talk
> of no deal has destabilised the province, in the context of simmering
> tensions
> over the breakdown of power sharing.
>
> The economic implications would also be severe. The highly integrated
> agri-food
> business would be severely disrupted. Indeed agriculture throughout the
> country
> would be affected. We expect major retailers to have contingency plans, so
> we
> would not anticipate food shortages. However, a chaotic Brexit would make
> the
> task of separating our WTO entitlements and obligations from those of the
> EU
> much harder, particularly if talks broke down acrimoniously.
>
> http://ukandeu.ac.uk/no-deal-will-bring-a-chaotic-brexit-to-the-fore/

but all of that is a very short term problem

bankrupting the country requires a long term cause

tim


>
> HTH
Christie
2017-10-11 18:06:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The Todal wrote:

>On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>
>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>>
>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least
>>> it is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have
>>> been treated to hitherto.
>>>
>>> Hooray!
>>>
>>> --
>>> James Harris
>>>
>>
>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem
>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>
>
>Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>bankrupcy for our nation.

Predictions of doom following all aspects of Brexit has so far proved
as reliable as religious 'end-of-the world' prophecies.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887

Quote:
"David Cameron, his Chancellor George Osborne and many other senior
figures who wanted to stay in the EU predicted an immediate economic
crisis if the UK voted to leave and it is true that the pound slumped
the day after the referendum - and remains around 10% lower against
the dollar and 15% down against the euro.

But predictions of immediate doom were wrong, with the UK economy
estimated to have grown 1.8% in 2016, second only to Germany's 1.9%
among the world's G7 leading industrialised nations. UK growth has
slowed so far in 2017, but the economy is still expanding. Inflation
has risen since June 2016 to stand at 2.6%, but unemployment has
continued to fall, to stand at a 42 year low of 4.4%. Annual house
price increases have fallen from 9.4% in June 2016 but were still at
an inflation-beating 4.7% in the year to May 2017, according to
official ONS figures."
James Harris
2017-10-11 19:12:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 11/10/2017 19:06, Christie wrote:
> The Todal wrote:
>
>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>
>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>>>
>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least
>>>> it is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have
>>>> been treated to hitherto.
>>>>
>>>> Hooray!
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> James Harris
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem
>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>
>>
>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>
> Predictions of doom following all aspects of Brexit has so far proved
> as reliable as religious 'end-of-the world' prophecies.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887
>
> Quote:
> "David Cameron, his Chancellor George Osborne and many other senior
> figures who wanted to stay in the EU predicted an immediate economic
> crisis if the UK voted to leave and it is true that the pound slumped
> the day after the referendum - and remains around 10% lower against
> the dollar and 15% down against the euro.
>
> But predictions of immediate doom were wrong, with the UK economy
> estimated to have grown 1.8% in 2016, second only to Germany's 1.9%
> among the world's G7 leading industrialised nations. UK growth has
> slowed so far in 2017, but the economy is still expanding. Inflation
> has risen since June 2016 to stand at 2.6%, but unemployment has
> continued to fall, to stand at a 42 year low of 4.4%. Annual house
> price increases have fallen from 9.4% in June 2016 but were still at
> an inflation-beating 4.7% in the year to May 2017, according to
> official ONS figures."

And Cabinet member Jeremy Hunt apparently told Iain Dale that he would
now vote Brexit because Osborne's predictions failed to come true and
because of the attitude towards the UK he's seen from the Brussels
elite. Treasury minister Liz Truss said similar today.

Realisation is dawning. :-)


--
James Harris
The Todal
2017-10-11 19:20:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 11/10/2017 20:12, James Harris wrote:
> On 11/10/2017 19:06, Christie wrote:
>> The Todal wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic
>>>>> streak.
>>>>>
>>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least
>>>>> it is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have
>>>>> been treated to hitherto.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hooray!
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> James Harris
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem
>>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>>
>> Predictions of doom following all aspects of Brexit has so far proved
>> as reliable as religious 'end-of-the world' prophecies.
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887
>>
>> Quote:
>> "David Cameron, his Chancellor George Osborne and many other senior
>> figures who wanted to stay in the EU predicted an immediate economic
>> crisis if the UK voted to leave and it is true that the pound slumped
>> the day after the referendum - and remains around 10% lower against
>> the dollar and 15% down against the euro.
>>
>> But predictions of immediate doom were wrong, with the UK economy
>> estimated to have grown 1.8% in 2016, second only to Germany's 1.9%
>> among the world's G7 leading industrialised nations. UK growth has
>> slowed so far in 2017, but the economy is still expanding. Inflation
>> has risen since June 2016 to stand at 2.6%, but unemployment has
>> continued to fall, to stand at a 42 year low of 4.4%. Annual house
>> price increases have fallen from 9.4% in June 2016 but were still at
>> an inflation-beating 4.7% in the year to May 2017, according to
>> official ONS figures."
>
> And Cabinet member Jeremy Hunt apparently told Iain Dale that he would
> now vote Brexit because Osborne's predictions failed to come true and
> because of the attitude towards the UK he's seen from the Brussels
> elite. Treasury minister Liz Truss said similar today.
>
> Realisation is dawning. :-)
>
>

What has any of this got to do with *no deal* meaning virtual bankruptcy
for our nation?

Oh, right, I see.

Because you no longer trust George Osborne, you now slavishly trust
Nigel Farage and the extremist Brexiters who lie to the nation and claim
that we don't even need an exit deal because everyone will be queueing
up to do business with us. It's a form of narcissism, or megalomania.

Well, no matter what you believe, the grownups will ensure that we
either have a workable Brexit deal or we remain in the EU.
Tim Woodall
2017-10-11 22:25:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 2017-10-11, The Todal <***@icloud.com> wrote:
>
> Well, no matter what you believe, the grownups will ensure that we
> either have a workable Brexit deal or we remain in the EU.

Conspiracy theory number 132.

TPTB are leading us into a catastrophic brexit so that then when we beg for
reentry we are forced to take the Euro and Schengen travel area.

(Thats the UK plot. The EU one to the same end is number 133 :-) )
abelard
2017-10-11 22:32:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 20:20:59 +0100, The Todal <***@icloud.com>
wrote:

>Well, no matter what you believe, the grownups will ensure that we
>either have a workable Brexit deal or we remain in the EU.

rotfl...


--
www.abelard.org
tim...
2017-10-12 10:49:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"The Todal" <***@icloud.com> wrote in message
news:***@mid.individual.net...
> On 11/10/2017 20:12, James Harris wrote:
>> On 11/10/2017 19:06, Christie wrote:
>>> The Todal wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic
>>>>>> streak.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for
>>>>>> pragmatism
>>>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least
>>>>>> it is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have
>>>>>> been treated to hitherto.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hooray!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> James Harris
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a
>>>>> problem
>>>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>>>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>>>
>>> Predictions of doom following all aspects of Brexit has so far proved
>>> as reliable as religious 'end-of-the world' prophecies.
>>>
>>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887
>>>
>>> Quote:
>>> "David Cameron, his Chancellor George Osborne and many other senior
>>> figures who wanted to stay in the EU predicted an immediate economic
>>> crisis if the UK voted to leave and it is true that the pound slumped
>>> the day after the referendum - and remains around 10% lower against
>>> the dollar and 15% down against the euro.
>>>
>>> But predictions of immediate doom were wrong, with the UK economy
>>> estimated to have grown 1.8% in 2016, second only to Germany's 1.9%
>>> among the world's G7 leading industrialised nations. UK growth has
>>> slowed so far in 2017, but the economy is still expanding. Inflation
>>> has risen since June 2016 to stand at 2.6%, but unemployment has
>>> continued to fall, to stand at a 42 year low of 4.4%. Annual house
>>> price increases have fallen from 9.4% in June 2016 but were still at
>>> an inflation-beating 4.7% in the year to May 2017, according to
>>> official ONS figures."
>>
>> And Cabinet member Jeremy Hunt apparently told Iain Dale that he would
>> now vote Brexit because Osborne's predictions failed to come true and
>> because of the attitude towards the UK he's seen from the Brussels elite.
>> Treasury minister Liz Truss said similar today.
>>
>> Realisation is dawning. :-)
>>
>>
>
> What has any of this got to do with *no deal* meaning virtual bankruptcy
> for our nation?
>
> Oh, right, I see.
>
> Because you no longer trust George Osborne, you now slavishly trust Nigel
> Farage and the extremist Brexiters who lie to the nation and claim that we
> don't even need an exit deal because everyone will be queueing up to do
> business with us.

No, it's because "no deal" will not lose us the quantity of trade that
bankrupts us

the idea that it will is a nonsense

tim
Christie
2017-10-11 22:54:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
James Harris wrote:

>On 11/10/2017 19:06, Christie wrote:
>> The Todal wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>>>>
>>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least
>>>>> it is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have
>>>>> been treated to hitherto.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hooray!
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> James Harris
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem
>>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>>
>> Predictions of doom following all aspects of Brexit has so far proved
>> as reliable as religious 'end-of-the world' prophecies.
>>
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887
>>
>> Quote:
>> "David Cameron, his Chancellor George Osborne and many other senior
>> figures who wanted to stay in the EU predicted an immediate economic
>> crisis if the UK voted to leave and it is true that the pound slumped
>> the day after the referendum - and remains around 10% lower against
>> the dollar and 15% down against the euro.
>>
>> But predictions of immediate doom were wrong, with the UK economy
>> estimated to have grown 1.8% in 2016, second only to Germany's 1.9%
>> among the world's G7 leading industrialised nations. UK growth has
>> slowed so far in 2017, but the economy is still expanding. Inflation
>> has risen since June 2016 to stand at 2.6%, but unemployment has
>> continued to fall, to stand at a 42 year low of 4.4%. Annual house
>> price increases have fallen from 9.4% in June 2016 but were still at
>> an inflation-beating 4.7% in the year to May 2017, according to
>> official ONS figures."
>
>And Cabinet member Jeremy Hunt apparently told Iain Dale that he would
>now vote Brexit because Osborne's predictions failed to come true and
>because of the attitude towards the UK he's seen from the Brussels
>elite. Treasury minister Liz Truss said similar today.

Yes, and I was a little disappointed that Theresa could not answer the
same hypothetical question in as straight forward a manner as both
Jeremy and Liz. But when Theresa was asked the question again in the
House of Commons during PMQ's she did clarify thus:

Quote:
"I am the Prime Minister ensuring that I am going to deliver Brexit
for the British people. I could sit here and I could say, 'oh I would
still vote Remain, or I would vote Leave', just to answer your
question. I am being open and honest with you, what I did last time
around was I looked at everything, and came to a judgement and I would
do exactly the same another time around."

But we are not having another referendum. That's absolutely crucial.
We are not having another referendum. We are going to deliver on the
vote of the British people and we are going to deliver Brexit. March
29, 2019, we come out of the European Union."

That seems fair enough to me.

>Realisation is dawning. :-)

:) Good.
Ian Jackson
2017-10-12 07:01:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message <orlqfb$mhu$***@dont-email.me>, James Harris
<***@gmail.com> writes
>On 11/10/2017 19:06, Christie wrote:
>> The Todal wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>>>>
>>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least
>>>>> it is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have
>>>>> been treated to hitherto.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hooray!
>>>>>
>>>>> -- James Harris
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem
>>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>> Predictions of doom following all aspects of Brexit has so far
>>proved
>> as reliable as religious 'end-of-the world' prophecies.
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887
>> Quote:
>> "David Cameron, his Chancellor George Osborne and many other senior
>> figures who wanted to stay in the EU predicted an immediate economic
>> crisis if the UK voted to leave and it is true that the pound slumped
>> the day after the referendum - and remains around 10% lower against
>> the dollar and 15% down against the euro.
>> But predictions of immediate doom were wrong, with the UK economy
>> estimated to have grown 1.8% in 2016, second only to Germany's 1.9%
>> among the world's G7 leading industrialised nations. UK growth has
>> slowed so far in 2017, but the economy is still expanding. Inflation
>> has risen since June 2016 to stand at 2.6%, but unemployment has
>> continued to fall, to stand at a 42 year low of 4.4%. Annual house
>> price increases have fallen from 9.4% in June 2016 but were still at
>> an inflation-beating 4.7% in the year to May 2017, according to
>> official ONS figures."
>
>And Cabinet member Jeremy Hunt apparently told Iain Dale that he would
>now vote Brexit because Osborne's predictions failed to come true and
>because of the attitude towards the UK he's seen from the Brussels
>elite. Treasury minister Liz Truss said similar today.
>
>Realisation is dawning. :-)

There has to be more to it than that. No one could have their opinions
so radically altered simply because one man's predictions haven't
completely come true (yet).
>
>

--
Ian
kat
2017-10-12 07:55:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12/10/2017 08:01, Ian Jackson wrote:
> In message <orlqfb$mhu$***@dont-email.me>, James Harris
> <***@gmail.com> writes
>> On 11/10/2017 19:06, Christie wrote:
>>> The Todal wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic
>>>>>> streak.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for
>>>>>> pragmatism
>>>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least
>>>>>> it is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have
>>>>>> been treated to hitherto.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hooray!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --  James Harris
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a
>>>>> problem
>>>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>>>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>>>  Predictions of doom following all aspects of Brexit has so far proved
>>> as reliable as religious 'end-of-the world' prophecies.
>>>  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887
>>>  Quote:
>>> "David Cameron, his Chancellor George Osborne and many other senior
>>> figures who wanted to stay in the EU predicted an immediate economic
>>> crisis if the UK voted to leave and it is true that the pound slumped
>>> the day after the referendum - and remains around 10% lower against
>>> the dollar and 15% down against the euro.
>>>  But predictions of immediate doom were wrong, with the UK economy
>>> estimated to have grown 1.8% in 2016, second only to Germany's 1.9%
>>> among the world's G7 leading industrialised nations. UK growth has
>>> slowed so far in 2017, but the economy is still expanding. Inflation
>>> has risen since June 2016 to stand at 2.6%, but unemployment has
>>> continued to fall, to stand at a 42 year low of 4.4%. Annual house
>>> price increases have fallen from 9.4% in June 2016 but were still at
>>> an inflation-beating 4.7% in the year to May 2017, according to
>>> official ONS figures."
>>
>> And Cabinet member Jeremy Hunt apparently told Iain Dale that he would
>> now vote Brexit because Osborne's predictions failed to come true and
>> because of the attitude towards the UK he's seen from the Brussels
>> elite. Treasury minister Liz Truss said similar today.
>>
>> Realisation is dawning. :-)
>
> There has to be more to it than that. No one could have their opinions
> so radically altered simply because one man's predictions haven't
> completely come true (yet).
>>
>>
>

A close friend of mine said the same thing a few weeks ago. Project
Fear had got to her, it didn't happen, so, then, other considerations
come into it.

--
kat
>^..^<
James Harris
2017-10-12 08:23:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12/10/2017 08:55, kat wrote:
> On 12/10/2017 08:01, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> In message <orlqfb$mhu$***@dont-email.me>, James Harris
>> <***@gmail.com> writes

...

>>> And Cabinet member Jeremy Hunt apparently told Iain Dale that he would
>>> now vote Brexit because Osborne's predictions failed to come true and
>>> because of the attitude towards the UK he's seen from the Brussels
>>> elite. Treasury minister Liz Truss said similar today.
>>>
>>> Realisation is dawning. :-)
>>
>> There has to be more to it than that. No one could have their opinions
>> so radically altered simply because one man's predictions haven't
>> completely come true (yet).

Ian, do you realise that the predictions of doom were only for the short
term? We are in that period now!

Things are suppressed a bit due to effects such as inflation and
uncertainty. But there's no doom. The promised firecracker turned out to
be a damp squib.

What's more, inflation is expected to drop back and the uncertainty will
go as our new relationship with the EU becomes clearer. As the
uncertainty goes businesses will increase investment again.

There will be economic ups and downs, for sure. That's what normally
happens. But as time goes on it will become increasingly meaningless for
people to try to attribute such effects to the Brexit vote. I'd be more
concerned about the levels of debt which are being built up.

>>>
>>>
>>
>
> A close friend of mine said the same thing a few weeks ago. Project
> Fear had got to her, it didn't happen, so, then, other considerations
> come into it.
>

How does she feel now?


--
James Harris
Ian Jackson
2017-10-12 10:46:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In message <orn8pa$b7p$***@dont-email.me>, James Harris
<***@gmail.com> writes
>On 12/10/2017 08:55, kat wrote:
>> On 12/10/2017 08:01, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>> In message <orlqfb$mhu$***@dont-email.me>, James Harris
>>> <***@gmail.com> writes
>
>...
>
>>>> And Cabinet member Jeremy Hunt apparently told Iain Dale that he would
>>>> now vote Brexit because Osborne's predictions failed to come true and
>>>> because of the attitude towards the UK he's seen from the Brussels
>>>> elite. Treasury minister Liz Truss said similar today.
>>>>
>>>> Realisation is dawning. :-)
>>>
>>> There has to be more to it than that. No one could have their opinions
>>> so radically altered simply because one man's predictions haven't
>>> completely come true (yet).
>
>Ian, do you realise that the predictions of doom were only for the
>short term? We are in that period now!

By "only for the short term" do you mean that the "doom" wouldn't last
for long? If so, why was anyone particularly worried?
>
>Things are suppressed a bit due to effects such as inflation and
>uncertainty. But there's no doom.

Maybe no doom yet - but there's certainly a lot of 'gloom'.

> The promised firecracker turned out to be a damp squib.

Was the immediate drop in the pound a vote of confidence in the UK
economy? OK, since the initial shock there's been a reasonable recovery,
but I suspect this is largely because nothing disastrous has happened
yet - and quite a lot of us are still living in hope that something that
isn't too bad will eventually emerge - although hopes are certainly
beginning to fade.
>
>What's more, inflation is expected to drop back and the uncertainty
>will go as our new relationship with the EU becomes clearer. As the
>uncertainty goes businesses will increase investment again.

While you could be right, I can't share your absolute confidence.
>
>There will be economic ups and downs, for sure. That's what normally
>happens. But as time goes on it will become increasingly meaningless
>for people to try to attribute such effects to the Brexit vote. I'd be
>more concerned about the levels of debt which are being built up.

As I've said before, it will be claimed that if things don't turn out
too badly, "it will all be because of Brexit". If things do turn out
badly, "it won't be because of Brexit".
>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> A close friend of mine said the same thing a few weeks ago. Project
>> Fear had got to her, it didn't happen, so, then, other considerations
>> come into it.
>>
>
>How does she feel now?
>
>

--
Ian
abelard
2017-10-12 11:02:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 12 Oct 2017 11:46:43 +0100, Ian Jackson
<***@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:


>Was the immediate drop in the pound a vote of confidence in the UK
>economy? OK, since the initial shock there's been a reasonable recovery,
>but I suspect this is largely because nothing disastrous has happened
>yet - and quite a lot of us are still living in hope that something that
>isn't too bad will eventually emerge - although hopes are certainly
>beginning to fade.


uk trade is only about 18% of uk economic activity...

therefore a drop of 10% in the £ would lose britain
10% of 18%...less than 2%...
the sort of number by which gdp rises in a year...


dropping your prices tends to increase your sales...
thus bringing advantages of scale and increased
profits....

i could expand plenty further....


socialist 'economics' is pants....

--
www.abelard.org
James Harris
2017-10-12 14:23:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12/10/2017 11:46, Ian Jackson wrote:
> In message <orn8pa$b7p$***@dont-email.me>, James Harris
> <***@gmail.com> writes
>> On 12/10/2017 08:55, kat wrote:
>>> On 12/10/2017 08:01, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>>> In message <orlqfb$mhu$***@dont-email.me>, James Harris
>>>> <***@gmail.com> writes
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>>> And Cabinet member Jeremy Hunt apparently told Iain Dale that he would
>>>>> now vote Brexit because Osborne's predictions failed to come true and
>>>>> because of the attitude towards the UK he's seen from the Brussels
>>>>> elite. Treasury minister Liz Truss said similar today.
>>>>>
>>>>> Realisation is dawning. :-)
>>>>
>>>> There has to be more to it than that. No one could have their opinions
>>>> so radically altered simply because one man's predictions haven't
>>>> completely come true (yet).
>>
>> Ian, do you realise that the predictions of doom were only for the
>> short term? We are in that period now!
>
> By "only for the short term" do you mean that the "doom" wouldn't last
> for long? If so, why was anyone particularly worried?

Not being funny but I'm not sure I can say why certain people were
worried because I was not one of them! Would you mind saying what was
that worried or concerned you? Maybe I can respond to that rather than
me guessing about what the worries were.

>>
>> Things are suppressed a bit due to effects such as inflation and
>> uncertainty. But there's no doom.
>
> Maybe no doom yet - but there's certainly a lot of 'gloom'.

You mean things like the banks being about to relocate staff?


>
>> The promised firecracker turned out to be a damp squib.
>
> Was the immediate drop in the pound a vote of confidence in the UK
> economy? OK, since the initial shock there's been a reasonable recovery,
> but I suspect this is largely because nothing disastrous has happened
> yet - and quite a lot of us are still living in hope that something that
> isn't too bad will eventually emerge - although hopes are certainly
> beginning to fade.

OK. It's interesting to hear such views.

I am no expert but from what I've pieced together from those who know
more about this stuff than I do the pound had been artificially high for
some time (more than a year) due to the UK's financial operations being
lifted by fiscal and monetary policy. That's not my assessment; you may
remember that the IMF had been telling us that the pound was overvalued
- by between 5% and 20%, IIRC.

The markets assumed that on 23 June 2016 we would vote to remain in the
EU and had priced in business-as-usual. The vote shocked them and let
them know that we were about to go through a period of uncertainty.
Therefore the pound dropped.

In general terms, the pound's value against other currencies can be seen
to change on the loss of or resumption of certainty. For example, when
Andrea Leadsom pulled out of the Conservative leadership race the pound
popped up noticeably. I presume that was down to the UK getting the
certainty of a new PM in place sooner than the traders had expected.

I think you are right that if the EU talks look as though they are not
going to produce a trade deal then the pound will drop again. But then
over time as the UK migrates to a WTO deal with the EU and as it begins
to build up global trade the pound will rise back up. The process may
take a few years.

(At the moment, I suspect the pound is still overvalued due to the UK's
focus on financial markets.)


>>
>> What's more, inflation is expected to drop back and the uncertainty
>> will go as our new relationship with the EU becomes clearer. As the
>> uncertainty goes businesses will increase investment again.
>
> While you could be right, I can't share your absolute confidence.

I don't have /absolute/ confidence. But what does reassure me a lot is
not the rhetoric from Remain or Leave advocates but seeing the
investments that businesses are making in the UK.

For sure, UK-based SMEs will be holding back on growing their businesses
until they see more of how Brexit is going to work out and can see how
it is going to affect them. But notice that the big corporates who have
to look many years ahead are making significant investments in Britain.
They wouldn't be doing that unless they thought that the UK will be a
good place to do business.


--
James Harris
tim...
2017-10-12 10:51:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:orn8pa$b7p$***@dont-email.me...
> On 12/10/2017 08:55, kat wrote:
>> On 12/10/2017 08:01, Ian Jackson wrote:
>>> In message <orlqfb$mhu$***@dont-email.me>, James Harris
>>> <***@gmail.com> writes
>
> ...
>
>>>> And Cabinet member Jeremy Hunt apparently told Iain Dale that he would
>>>> now vote Brexit because Osborne's predictions failed to come true and
>>>> because of the attitude towards the UK he's seen from the Brussels
>>>> elite. Treasury minister Liz Truss said similar today.
>>>>
>>>> Realisation is dawning. :-)
>>>
>>> There has to be more to it than that. No one could have their opinions
>>> so radically altered simply because one man's predictions haven't
>>> completely come true (yet).
>
> Ian, do you realise that the predictions of doom were only for the short
> term? We are in that period now!
>
> Things are suppressed a bit due to effects such as inflation and
> uncertainty. But there's no doom. The promised firecracker turned out to
> be a damp squib.
>
> What's more, inflation is expected to drop back and the uncertainty will
> go as our new relationship with the EU becomes clearer. As the uncertainty
> goes businesses will increase investment again.
>
> There will be economic ups and downs, for sure. That's what normally
> happens. But as time goes on it will become increasingly meaningless for
> people to try to attribute such effects to the Brexit vote. I'd be more
> concerned about the levels of debt which are being built up.

and the snowflakes voting in a Labour government so that they can collect
their free unicorn

tim
kat
2017-10-12 17:34:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12/10/2017 09:23, James Harris wrote:
> On 12/10/2017 08:55, kat wrote:


>> A close friend of mine said the same thing a few weeks ago.  Project
>> Fear had got to her, it didn't happen, so, then, other considerations
>> come into it.
>>
>
> How does she feel now?
>
>

That we should just get on and leave.

--
kat
>^..^<
Bod
2017-10-12 17:45:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12/10/2017 18:34, kat wrote:
> On 12/10/2017 09:23, James Harris wrote:
>> On 12/10/2017 08:55, kat wrote:
>
>
>>> A close friend of mine said the same thing a few weeks ago.  Project
>>> Fear had got to her, it didn't happen, so, then, other considerations
>>> come into it.
>>>
>>
>> How does she feel now?
>>
>>
>
> That we should just get on and leave.
>
Yup, just leave NOW.

--
Bod
The Todal
2017-10-12 11:26:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12/10/2017 08:55, kat wrote:
> On 12/10/2017 08:01, Ian Jackson wrote:
>> In message <orlqfb$mhu$***@dont-email.me>, James Harris
>> <***@gmail.com> writes
>>> On 11/10/2017 19:06, Christie wrote:
>>>> The Todal wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>>>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic
>>>>>>> streak.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for
>>>>>>> pragmatism
>>>>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at
>>>>>>> least
>>>>>>> it is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have
>>>>>>> been treated to hitherto.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hooray!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --  James Harris
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a
>>>>>> problem
>>>>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>>>>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>>>>  Predictions of doom following all aspects of Brexit has so far proved
>>>> as reliable as religious 'end-of-the world' prophecies.
>>>>  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887
>>>>  Quote:
>>>> "David Cameron, his Chancellor George Osborne and many other senior
>>>> figures who wanted to stay in the EU predicted an immediate economic
>>>> crisis if the UK voted to leave and it is true that the pound slumped
>>>> the day after the referendum - and remains around 10% lower against
>>>> the dollar and 15% down against the euro.
>>>>  But predictions of immediate doom were wrong, with the UK economy
>>>> estimated to have grown 1.8% in 2016, second only to Germany's 1.9%
>>>> among the world's G7 leading industrialised nations. UK growth has
>>>> slowed so far in 2017, but the economy is still expanding. Inflation
>>>> has risen since June 2016 to stand at 2.6%, but unemployment has
>>>> continued to fall, to stand at a 42 year low of 4.4%. Annual house
>>>> price increases have fallen from 9.4% in June 2016 but were still at
>>>> an inflation-beating 4.7% in the year to May 2017, according to
>>>> official ONS figures."
>>>
>>> And Cabinet member Jeremy Hunt apparently told Iain Dale that he
>>> would now vote Brexit because Osborne's predictions failed to come
>>> true and because of the attitude towards the UK he's seen from the
>>> Brussels elite. Treasury minister Liz Truss said similar today.
>>>
>>> Realisation is dawning. :-)
>>
>> There has to be more to it than that. No one could have their opinions
>> so radically altered simply because one man's predictions haven't
>> completely come true (yet).
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> A close friend of mine said the same thing a few weeks ago.  Project
> Fear had got to her, it didn't happen, so, then, other considerations
> come into it.
>

It's exactly the same with Global Warming. All these dire predictions
about climate change and how the world will end up with less food, more
droughts and floods and starvation. And none of it has come about, so
why on earth should we bother about it now?

Anyway, if it does happen there are lots of brainy people who will solve
it for us. We're a very resourceful country/world and we've always
solved all our problems in the past.
The Todal
2017-10-12 11:29:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12/10/2017 08:01, Ian Jackson wrote:
> In message <orlqfb$mhu$***@dont-email.me>, James Harris
> <***@gmail.com> writes
>> On 11/10/2017 19:06, Christie wrote:
>>> The Todal wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic
>>>>>> streak.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for
>>>>>> pragmatism
>>>>>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least
>>>>>> it is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have
>>>>>> been treated to hitherto.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hooray!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --  James Harris
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a
>>>>> problem
>>>>> with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>>>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>>>  Predictions of doom following all aspects of Brexit has so far proved
>>> as reliable as religious 'end-of-the world' prophecies.
>>>  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32810887
>>>  Quote:
>>> "David Cameron, his Chancellor George Osborne and many other senior
>>> figures who wanted to stay in the EU predicted an immediate economic
>>> crisis if the UK voted to leave and it is true that the pound slumped
>>> the day after the referendum - and remains around 10% lower against
>>> the dollar and 15% down against the euro.
>>>  But predictions of immediate doom were wrong, with the UK economy
>>> estimated to have grown 1.8% in 2016, second only to Germany's 1.9%
>>> among the world's G7 leading industrialised nations. UK growth has
>>> slowed so far in 2017, but the economy is still expanding. Inflation
>>> has risen since June 2016 to stand at 2.6%, but unemployment has
>>> continued to fall, to stand at a 42 year low of 4.4%. Annual house
>>> price increases have fallen from 9.4% in June 2016 but were still at
>>> an inflation-beating 4.7% in the year to May 2017, according to
>>> official ONS figures."
>>
>> And Cabinet member Jeremy Hunt apparently told Iain Dale that he would
>> now vote Brexit because Osborne's predictions failed to come true and
>> because of the attitude towards the UK he's seen from the Brussels
>> elite. Treasury minister Liz Truss said similar today.
>>
>> Realisation is dawning. :-)
>
> There has to be more to it than that. No one could have their opinions
> so radically altered simply because one man's predictions haven't
> completely come true (yet).


Of course there's more to it than that.

It's the realisation that you can only succeed in politics and be a
contender for the leadership if you embrace the Will of the People and
renounce the heresy of Remaining.

Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM hardware, the choice of the majority.
Vidcapper
2017-10-12 06:40:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 11/10/2017 16:34, The Todal wrote:
> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>
>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic
>>> streak.
>>>
>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for
>>> pragmatism in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal
>>> but at least it is being discussed more realistically than the
>>> hysterics we have been treated to hitherto.
>>>
>>> Hooray!
>>>
>>> --
>>> James Harris
>>>
>>
>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a
>> problem with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>
>
> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
> bankrupcy for our nation.

Project Fear failed miserably last year, so what's the point in trying
to resuscitate it?


--

Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
Incubus
2017-10-12 08:36:26 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 12/10/2017 07:40, Vidcapper wrote:
> On 11/10/2017 16:34, The Todal wrote:
>> On 11/10/2017 14:21, Phi wrote:
>>>
>>> "James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>>>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not
>>>> because I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic
>>>> streak.
>>>>
>>>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>>>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>>>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for
>>>> pragmatism in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal
>>>> but at least it is being discussed more realistically than the
>>>> hysterics we have been treated to hitherto.
>>>>
>>>> Hooray!
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> James Harris
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a
>>> problem with borders with Sweden and Finland.
>>>
>>
>> Theresa May is still scared to admit that no deal will mean virtual
>> bankrupcy for our nation.
>
> Project Fear failed miserably last year, so what's the point in trying
> to resuscitate it?

It's the only dead donkey they have.
Judith
2017-10-13 01:44:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 13:21:36 -0000, "Phi" <***@inbox.com> wrote:

>
>"James Harris" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:orl1rh$m9h$***@dont-email.me...
>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not because I
>> want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>
>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism in
>> what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least it is
>> being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been treated
>> to hitherto.
>>
>> Hooray!
>>
>> --
>> James Harris
>>
>
>Why can't we have a deal like Norway, they don't seem to have a problem with
>borders with Sweden and Finland.


They didn't have Mayhem's maniacs negotiating for them.
shutemdown
2017-10-11 12:28:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 13:12:31 +0100, James Harris wrote:

> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not because
> I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>
> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least it
> is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been
> treated to hitherto.
>
> Hooray!

hooray!

More Brexit headaches as trade with the EU rises and UK exports to the
rest of the world fall

LONDON – The UK's trade gap with the world widened and construction
output fell in the three months to August, according to the latest data
from the Office of National Statistics.

The UK's trade deficit with the rest of the world— the shortfall between
exports and imports — increased by £2.9 billion to £10.8 billion, the ONS
said.

Exports of goods to the European Union increased by 4.1%, while exports
to non-EU countries fell more than 8% led by a decrease in fuel exports.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/uk-economy-exports-construction-2017-10?
r=US&IR=T
abelard
2017-10-11 12:39:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:28:09 -0000 (UTC), shutemdown
<***@asiks.org> wrote:

>On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 13:12:31 +0100, James Harris wrote:
>
>> I'm loving this talk on the media about No Deal. I say that not because
>> I want there to be no deal or because of some masochistic streak.
>>
>> But what I do like is that for the first time it is being discussed
>> without the political equivalent of people running around in a panic
>> screaming about the end being nigh. There is still room for pragmatism
>> in what the public are being told to expect from No Deal but at least it
>> is being discussed more realistically than the hysterics we have been
>> treated to hitherto.
>>
>> Hooray!
>
>hooray!
>
>More Brexit headaches as trade with the EU rises and UK exports to the
>rest of the world fall
>
>LONDON – The UK's trade gap with the world widened and construction
>output fell in the three months to August, according to the latest data
>from the Office of National Statistics.
>
>The UK's trade deficit with the rest of the world— the shortfall between
>exports and imports — increased by £2.9 billion to £10.8 billion, the ONS
>said.
>
>Exports of goods to the European Union increased by 4.1%, while exports
>to non-EU countries fell more than 8% led by a decrease in fuel exports.
>
>http://uk.businessinsider.com/uk-economy-exports-construction-2017-10?
>r=US&IR=T

why do you care about trade deficits?

eg, they end up with pieces of paper while britain ends up
with useful good and chattels...


--
www.abelard.org
Loading...