UKIP - The Future - Volume 3
Discussion
Mr_B said:
Zod said:
brenflys777 said:
Outgoing Baroso says no change.
Incoming Juncker says.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29731120
Nil points Dave.
Have you ever negotiated a corporate deal? or a litigation settlement? Do you think that before sitting down to negotiate the parties say that they are going to make concessions?Incoming Juncker says.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29731120
Nil points Dave.
This is meaningless posturing on both sides.
turbobloke said:
Zod said:
Have you ever negotiated a corporate deal? or a litigation settlement?
Yes and yes, party to both.Zod said:
Do you think that before sitting down to negotiate the parties say that they are going to make concessions?
At least your comment recognises implicitly that the EU-UK relationship is adversarial more than matrimonial. Time for a divorce. turbobloke said:
Mr_B said:
...and then you have a very unhappy EU...
Then?! Hang on a mo - the EU is currently a happy place?A move on the very basic and heart of the EU in the form of any restriction of freedom of movement and making a special case for the EU's least popular country would be a massive shift. At that point you have a very real prospect of a breakup.
Nothing is gong to happen with the EU and they won't give Cameron anything meaningful, they will simply leave it and see who wins in 2015, and then if it's the Tory party, sit and wait until Dave delivers on a referendum.
Zod said:
The French and Germans both want change. They are just letting us be the bad guys. There is every chance of a change.
That sounds alarmingly like a battered wife saying she wants to go back to her thug of a husband, who believes his promises that he's changed after giving her the umpteenth beating....Zod said:
Have you ever negotiated a corporate deal? or a litigation settlement? Do you think that before sitting down to negotiate the parties say that they are going to make concessions?
This is meaningless posturing on both sides.
Yes, they should take a rule out of Cameron's book of negotiations; insist you will concede to their demands and support their position regardless of the outcome.This is meaningless posturing on both sides.
Zod said:
turbobloke said:
Zod said:
Have you ever negotiated a corporate deal? or a litigation settlement?
Yes and yes, party to both.Zod said:
Do you think that before sitting down to negotiate the parties say that they are going to make concessions?
At least your comment recognises implicitly that the EU-UK relationship is adversarial more than matrimonial. Time for a divorce. The EU also knows that it doesn't even have to have the discussion unless the Tories win in May. They know that if Miliband wins or Clegg is heavily involved then they need do nothing. They are not therefore going to say anything to encourage anybody into thinking anything other than that there is no room for movement/negotiation.
What they might say if Cameron wins is another matter.....
Zod said:
Mr_B said:
Zod said:
brenflys777 said:
Outgoing Baroso says no change.
Incoming Juncker says.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29731120
Nil points Dave.
Have you ever negotiated a corporate deal? or a litigation settlement? Do you think that before sitting down to negotiate the parties say that they are going to make concessions?Incoming Juncker says.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29731120
Nil points Dave.
This is meaningless posturing on both sides.
It was odd to hear both Labour and Tory taking that exact line yesterday claiming those types of changes would lead to a form of control and reduction in numbers. I found it most odd as both Labour and Tory claimed those factors had no such bearing on immigration and Ukip were nasty racists to suggest as such not so long ago. How things change eh ?
Guam said:
Zod said:
Have you ever negotiated a corporate deal? or a litigation settlement? Do you think that before sitting down to negotiate the parties say that they are going to make concessions?
This is meaningless posturing on both sides.
Do the words initial offer, or letter of intent mean anything to you, one has to set parameters for the deal prior to entering into negotiations, unless the outline proposal is accepted as the premise of the negotiations what are you going to negotiate.This is meaningless posturing on both sides.
If the other party basically says get stuffed there can be no negotiation as that will be illegal and therefore outside of our remit then you cant negotiate anything. Unless you hold a negotiation to establish what you are going to negotiate.
Most corporate deals are agreed in broad principle (concept) before the parties waste their time in sitting around a table to negotiate, if anyone doesn't know that then they haven't done any major deal making imho.
Put more simply "are you interested in selling your business"? Straight no means no negotiation
We all know that if you want £2k for your car you advertise it for £2.5k, buyer offers £1.5K and you end up with the £2k you originally wanted minus a tank of fuel perhaps. If you ask for too much in the 1st place you will get no calls, if someone offers you £1k at the outset you tell them to ps off.
So why not formally tell the EU (and us plebs)what the lines in the sand are and if the response is not one of yes ok in principle, then why bother going through the whole charade? At the moment Junkers et al are saying no way Jose. The trouble is CMD is being disingenuous, he wants to stay in the EU regardless, and Angela et al know it, so does not have the leverage of threatening to walk away and being taken seriously.
And yes I have been involved in negotiations and very rarely has it been that the "game" hasn't been played where it ends up both parties ended up actually getting, more or less, what they wanted in the 1st place and have often been exasperated by the faux process you have to go through to get back to where you started.
Can you still buy brown envelopes?
Zod said:
brenflys777 said:
Outgoing Baroso says no change.
Incoming Juncker says.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29731120
Nil points Dave.
Have you ever negotiated a corporate deal? or a litigation settlement? Do you think that before sitting down to negotiate the parties say that they are going to make concessions?Incoming Juncker says.....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29731120
Nil points Dave.
This is meaningless posturing on both sides.
Dave has had four years to get meaningful change in the EU. We have nothing to show for it. Unless he produces some evidence that he can deliver I'd rather look at the evidence. In public Dave says he can get lots, the EU say he will get nothing. It's possible that they will each make concessions, it's also quite possible that one side won't and nothing will happen. For that reason if Cameron can't deliver in 4 years why would anyone think he can manage anything meaningful in another two. However as the Lisbon treaty shows putting someone in power who wants to stay in the EU means that ever closure union will continue, it might be that by the time Cameron is shown to have failed it might be too late.
Guam said:
Wombat3 said:
Indeed so,
The EU also knows that it doesn't even have to have the discussion unless the Tories win in May. They know that if Miliband wins or Clegg is heavily involved then they need do nothing. They are not therefore going to say anything to encourage anybody into thinking anything other than that there is no room for movement/negotiation.
What they might say if Cameron wins is another matter.....
All of which he could have avoided by bringing the referendum forward, oh wait Clegg minor wouldn't let me sir The EU also knows that it doesn't even have to have the discussion unless the Tories win in May. They know that if Miliband wins or Clegg is heavily involved then they need do nothing. They are not therefore going to say anything to encourage anybody into thinking anything other than that there is no room for movement/negotiation.
What they might say if Cameron wins is another matter.....
Sorry wombat no one believes that any longer and that is why they appear to be up for a serious kicking in 2015
Guam said:
Zod said:
The French and Germans both want change. They are just letting us be the bad guys. There is every chance of a change.
Really, so Barroso and his replacement are misleading us all then and the fact that the commission holds all the cards means nothing either?Now who is dreaming?
FiF said:
jogon said:
FiF said:
New poll from Rochester & Strood, the 271st most Ukip-friendly seat:
UKIP 43
CON 30
LAB 21
LD 3
GRN 2
Ooof, Dave said he would go all out two win this by-election this will be three defeats on the trot for him, grey suits will be circling like vultures. UKIP 43
CON 30
LAB 21
LD 3
GRN 2
Serves him right.
This poll was after the Tory blitz of the constituency for their primary!
Secondly it's by ComRes. Remember my last criticism of the last poll by Survation where said that the actual poll may be closer as they'd included the 2010 did not votes.
Well ComRes usually don't do that. Not seen data yet but might be eating my words with a big helping of humble pie.
In short 'kinell and can now see why a ton of money has just gone on UKIP to win.
Looked at the data.
Almost the entire UKIP lead effectively relies on getting 2010 non voters to turn out on a late November by-election. That's not going to be easy.
Secondly the over 65 group, usually best for UKIP support only leads by 1%.
Thirdly Cons doing well in socio- economic groups AB.
Finally less good news for Cons is that people are viewing the senior politician blitzing as evidence that Cons are desperate and running scared. Reflects some comments on here.
So still closer than that poll result suggests is my analysis for Rochester, i.e. a knife edge and 2015GE prediction stays for the moment at 3-6 possibly 10.
Guam said:
mrpurple said:
Very naive I know but why waste so much time, energy and money with faux negotiations?
We all know that if you want £2k for your car you advertise it for £2.5k, buyer offers £1.5K and you end up with the £2k you originally wanted minus a tank of fuel perhaps. If you ask for too much in the 1st place you will get no calls, if someone offers you £1k at the outset you tell them to ps off.
So why not formally tell the EU (and us plebs)what the lines in the sand are and if the response is not one of yes ok in principle, then why bother going through the whole charade? At the moment Junkers et al are saying no way Jose. The trouble is CMD is being disingenuous, he wants to stay in the EU regardless, and Angela et al know it, so does not have the leverage of threatening to walk away and being taken seriously.
And yes I have been involved in negotiations and very rarely has it been that the "game" hasn't been played where it ends up both parties ended up actually getting, more or less, what they wanted in the 1st place and have often been exasperated by the faux process you have to go through to get back to where you started.
Can you still buy brown envelopes?
Quite, any smart businessman knows that some supposed approaches are just intelligence gathering excercises by a potential competitor, your first clue is when they refuse to sign an NDA We all know that if you want £2k for your car you advertise it for £2.5k, buyer offers £1.5K and you end up with the £2k you originally wanted minus a tank of fuel perhaps. If you ask for too much in the 1st place you will get no calls, if someone offers you £1k at the outset you tell them to ps off.
So why not formally tell the EU (and us plebs)what the lines in the sand are and if the response is not one of yes ok in principle, then why bother going through the whole charade? At the moment Junkers et al are saying no way Jose. The trouble is CMD is being disingenuous, he wants to stay in the EU regardless, and Angela et al know it, so does not have the leverage of threatening to walk away and being taken seriously.
And yes I have been involved in negotiations and very rarely has it been that the "game" hasn't been played where it ends up both parties ended up actually getting, more or less, what they wanted in the 1st place and have often been exasperated by the faux process you have to go through to get back to where you started.
Can you still buy brown envelopes?
The idea that a business enters into a negotiation blind without any preamble and broad terms in play is laughable.
The very fact there aren't any in play now tells us all we need to know about CMD and his "renegotiation" bks.
If there was any serious possibility the EU would be positioning things in a less combative manner, along the lines of "of course this is a difficult issue to resolve however we will do everything we can to come to some accommodation as we understand the issues faced in the UK".
They are just going NON at every turn, this needs to be seen for what it is and we need to accept that the referendum must be held, the danger will be that if it goes against the Europhiles, the EU will come back with the Scots Gambit and make promises of change to persuade us to change and get Parliament to overule the result or run the referendum again.
We need to make it plain that that game wont work here, we hold it and if its an out then that's what will happen, no second bite at it.
Guam said:
mrpurple said:
Very naive I know but why waste so much time, energy and money with faux negotiations?
We all know that if you want £2k for your car you advertise it for £2.5k, buyer offers £1.5K and you end up with the £2k you originally wanted minus a tank of fuel perhaps. If you ask for too much in the 1st place you will get no calls, if someone offers you £1k at the outset you tell them to ps off.
So why not formally tell the EU (and us plebs)what the lines in the sand are and if the response is not one of yes ok in principle, then why bother going through the whole charade? At the moment Junkers et al are saying no way Jose. The trouble is CMD is being disingenuous, he wants to stay in the EU regardless, and Angela et al know it, so does not have the leverage of threatening to walk away and being taken seriously.
And yes I have been involved in negotiations and very rarely has it been that the "game" hasn't been played where it ends up both parties ended up actually getting, more or less, what they wanted in the 1st place and have often been exasperated by the faux process you have to go through to get back to where you started.
Can you still buy brown envelopes?
Quite, any smart businessman knows that some supposed approaches are just intelligence gathering excercises by a potential competitor, your first clue is when they refuse to sign an NDA We all know that if you want £2k for your car you advertise it for £2.5k, buyer offers £1.5K and you end up with the £2k you originally wanted minus a tank of fuel perhaps. If you ask for too much in the 1st place you will get no calls, if someone offers you £1k at the outset you tell them to ps off.
So why not formally tell the EU (and us plebs)what the lines in the sand are and if the response is not one of yes ok in principle, then why bother going through the whole charade? At the moment Junkers et al are saying no way Jose. The trouble is CMD is being disingenuous, he wants to stay in the EU regardless, and Angela et al know it, so does not have the leverage of threatening to walk away and being taken seriously.
And yes I have been involved in negotiations and very rarely has it been that the "game" hasn't been played where it ends up both parties ended up actually getting, more or less, what they wanted in the 1st place and have often been exasperated by the faux process you have to go through to get back to where you started.
Can you still buy brown envelopes?
The idea that a business enters into a negotiation blind without any preamble and broad terms in play is laughable.
The very fact there aren't any in play now tells us all we need to know about CMD and his "renegotiation" bks.
If there was any serious possibility the EU would be positioning things in a less combative manner, along the lines of "of course this is a difficult issue to resolve however we will do everything we can to come to some accommodation as we understand the issues faced in the UK".
They are just going NON at every turn, this needs to be seen for what it is and we need to accept that the referendum must be held, the danger will be that if it goes against the Europhiles, the EU will come back with the Scots Gambit and make promises of change to persuade us to change and get Parliament to overule the result or run the referendum again.
We need to make it plain that that game wont work here, we hold it and if its an out then that's what will happen, no second bite at it.
mrpurple said:
Perhaps I should have added that in my experience of negotiations they only people that really gained very much from these faux negotiations were solicitors or freelance QS's pretending to argue over items that were only put in as "throwaway" items in the 1st place.
You should use better solicitors then. My clients are major companies and investment banks. They won't stand for that kind of behaviour and they won't pay for useless posturing.WinstonWolf said:
Interesting, it's Dave's insistence on chasing the green vote that finally stopped me voting Tory. Big mistake Dave...
Me too. The final straw. In reality it was not the chase but the flatrefusal to aallow it to be discussed. The issue is settled, don't like it then sod off.
So big mistake Dave indeed.
Zod said:
Guam said:
Zod said:
The French and Germans both want change. They are just letting us be the bad guys. There is every chance of a change.
Really, so Barroso and his replacement are misleading us all then and the fact that the commission holds all the cards means nothing either?Now who is dreaming?
And that we are powerless to control fishing in our own waters, and we are powerless to set tax rates (VAT?) outside of EU guidelines, and we have to abide by EU manufacturing rules for things that are not destined for the EU anyway, and we are powerless to make our own trade deals... and the list goes on...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff