How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 4)
Discussion
psi310398 said:
The point he makes about Australia forcing Amazon to levy GST isn't false, is it? If Australians can face down Amazon, then I think a country with a population three times its size might be able to manage. It might do a fair bit to save our High Streets.
Under EU law Amazon charge already pay UK VAT on goods sold in the UK. As I said Elphicke is an idiot.Ghibli said:
The people who voted to leave still don't know what they will be getting, why should they get another choice while the remaining 48% don't get a choice ?
See responses above. The 48% had a chance to have their view prevail. It didn't. Another course of action was chosen. But there is no reason why they can't choose between implementation options if such a question is put to them.
And BTW, I'm not advocating another referendum. My view is that HMG should get on with delivering what it promised.
Ghibli said:
The people who voted to leave still don't know what they will be getting, why should they get another choice while the remaining 48% don't get a choice ?
1. The 48% would get the same choice as everyone else - leave with the deal or leave without the deal2. The 48% lost the original referendum
Mrr T said:
Under EU law Amazon charge already pay UK VAT on goods sold in the UK. As I said Elphicke is an idiot.
Err. You might want to read the NAO report on the subject. The EU is using Amazon, inter alios, as a reason why it can't trust the UK to collect duties on its behalf.
Here's an explanation of how Amazon and eBay are turning a blind eye to, if not actively facilitating, VAT fraud:
http://www.vatfraud.org
Amazon in Australia:
https://www.theage.com.au/national/amazon-s-amazin...
Edited by psi310398 on Monday 30th July 10:01
psi310398 said:
See responses above.
The 48% had a chance to have their view prevail. It didn't. Another course of action was chosen. But there is no reason why they can't choose between implementation options if such a question is put to them.
52% had their chance, why do they need another vote on what they have already voted for?The 48% had a chance to have their view prevail. It didn't. Another course of action was chosen. But there is no reason why they can't choose between implementation options if such a question is put to them.
The vote that sidick suggested would only apply to people who voted to leave. That's not democracy.
sidicks said:
1. The 48% would get the same choice as everyone else - leave with the deal or leave without the deal
2. The 48% lost the original referendum
Great, the 48% would get a vote on two options of which they want neither.2. The 48% lost the original referendum
How about a vote to stay in the EU or to stay in the EU, does that sound fair?
Ghibli said:
Great, the 48% would get a vote on two options of which they want neither.
How about a vote to stay in the EU or to stay in the EU, does that sound fair?
fHow about a vote to stay in the EU or to stay in the EU, does that sound fair?
king hell you made me laugh this morning. we had the in / out vote. we voted out.
in my humble opinion we will leave with no deal, and at the last minute a extension to current rules for another 2 years will take place.
psi310398 said:
No they don't.
The concepts are not difficult.
The country voted in a referendum that was explicitly run on the basis that it was once-only question and the government would act on the result. Under the rules of that referendum, Leave won by a bigger margin than any other vote in British history. The country therefore decided to leave. That is democracy.
The only conceivable justification for having a further referendum would be to put to the people a question on the negotiated deal if indeed there is one. Do you accept the deal or not? If not, we leave without a negotiated deal.
Wrong! The concepts are not difficult.
The country voted in a referendum that was explicitly run on the basis that it was once-only question and the government would act on the result. Under the rules of that referendum, Leave won by a bigger margin than any other vote in British history. The country therefore decided to leave. That is democracy.
The only conceivable justification for having a further referendum would be to put to the people a question on the negotiated deal if indeed there is one. Do you accept the deal or not? If not, we leave without a negotiated deal.
You, like many Leaver's on here, are Dictating that Democracy is only on your Terms.
If enough people who voted Leave in the 1st Referendum demonstrate a change of mind, they are legally, morally, ethically and Democratically allowed to voice that via a 2nd Referendum by way of a Remain option.
I have previously opined that such a move would require absolute certainty that the Electorate wanted it and that it would not be an easy decision, however, it is not impossible and we are, in fact, seeing cracks appearing amongst Leave Voters whereby some are expressing that they would rather Remain than accept No Deal or the Negotiated Deal. Those Leaver's, if sufficient in number, are entitled to be included on the Ballot.
Ghibli said:
amusingduck said:
Assume Remain win a second referendum. By your logic, any future referendums on future EU treaties must have three options. Accept treaty, reject treaty, leave the EU. Accept/Reject would only apply to remain voters and not the whole country
The people were asked, they were told they would decide, and the government would do whatever we decided. I don't see how it is good for democracy to break that promise.
Sure, the people can change their mind, but there would have to be a pretty decisive shift in public opinion to justify it. I haven't seen that. There's nothing that suggests to me that the decisive shift will be coming, either, because the economic arguments against leaving do nothing to solve the overwhelmingly political justifications that leave voters voted for.
z4RRSchris said:
fking hell you made me laugh this morning.
we had the in / out vote. we voted out.
in my humble opinion we will leave with no deal, and at the last minute a extension to current rules for another 2 years will take place.
It makes me laugh that leave voted to leave and they still don't know what they want or will be getting.king hell you made me laugh this morning. we had the in / out vote. we voted out.
in my humble opinion we will leave with no deal, and at the last minute a extension to current rules for another 2 years will take place.
They seem to think it would be ok to have a referendum on what they will be getting though.
JagLover said:
It is indeed complex but often it is so blatant you can see very well what is going on.
For example Starbucks which funnelled most of its European profits through that well known coffee producing country, the Netherlands, via a royalty fee for the use of its intellectual property such as its brand and business processes.
Expecting Multinationals to pay the same tax rate as anyone else on their "true" UK profits doesn't seem to be me to be too onerous and will indeed be easier to achieve outside the EU.
Charging a fee for use of a trade mark, in the case of Starbucks the name and logo, is standard practice for international companies. Many UK companies operating internationally do the same. If HMRC decided the expence was not reasonable it would disallow it.For example Starbucks which funnelled most of its European profits through that well known coffee producing country, the Netherlands, via a royalty fee for the use of its intellectual property such as its brand and business processes.
Expecting Multinationals to pay the same tax rate as anyone else on their "true" UK profits doesn't seem to be me to be too onerous and will indeed be easier to achieve outside the EU.
Ghibli said:
If remain had won the referendum and there was to be another referendum with the options of.
1. Remain in the EU
2. Remain in the EU
Would that be democracy?
Sorry, I don't have access to whatever it is you are smoking so I'm finding it hard to follow your thinking1. Remain in the EU
2. Remain in the EU
Would that be democracy?
. Remain is a status quo option.
In the spirit of helpfulness, however, let's have a go.
I could conceive theoretically of, let's see, a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty; do we want to go further with the European project or stick where we are?
Oh yes, despite manifesto commitments, we weren't actually offered that one, were we?
But, yes, it is possible to envisage a binary stay set of questions. If they were relevant to situation at hand.
psi310398 said:
Sorry, I don't have access to whatever it is you are smoking so I'm finding it hard to follow your thinking.
Remain is a status quo option.
In the spirit of helpfulness, however, let's have a go.
I could conceive theoretically of, let's see, a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty; do we want to go further with the European project or stick where we are?
Oh yes, despite manifesto commitments, we weren't actually offered that one, were we?
But, yes, it is possible to envisage a binary stay set of questions. If they were relevant to situation at hand.
But we are talking about the options that sidick has given.. Remain is a status quo option.
In the spirit of helpfulness, however, let's have a go.
I could conceive theoretically of, let's see, a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty; do we want to go further with the European project or stick where we are?
Oh yes, despite manifesto commitments, we weren't actually offered that one, were we?
But, yes, it is possible to envisage a binary stay set of questions. If they were relevant to situation at hand.
psi310398 said:
Ghibli said:
If remain had won the referendum and there was to be another referendum with the options of.
1. Remain in the EU
2. Remain in the EU
Would that be democracy?
Sorry, I don't have access to whatever it is you are smoking so I'm finding it hard to follow your thinking1. Remain in the EU
2. Remain in the EU
Would that be democracy?
. Remain is a status quo option.
In the spirit of helpfulness, however, let's have a go.
I could conceive theoretically of, let's see, a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty; do we want to go further with the European project or stick where we are?
Oh yes, despite manifesto commitments, we weren't actually offered that one, were we?
But, yes, it is possible to envisage a binary stay set of questions. If they were relevant to situation at hand.
sidicks said:
1. The 48% would get the same choice as everyone else - leave with the deal or leave without the deal
2. The 48% lost the original referendum
You are steadfastly labouring under the false assumption - or wish because it suits you - that people are not allowed to change their minds and that each decision they make is a Lifetime one. 2. The 48% lost the original referendum
Whilst Referendums are indeed rare enough to be Lifetime decisions generally, show us where it is written in Law that they cannot be held on the same Issue within a short period of time.
The absolute fact is, the Government has within its power to call a 2nd Referendum if it chooses to and it can include a Remain option, if it chooses to. You and any other Leaver who hates that fact will have to rely upon it never happening rather that trying to debate why such an occurrence is undemocratic because you are, quite simply, wrong.
Coolbanana said:
sidicks said:
1. The 48% would get the same choice as everyone else - leave with the deal or leave without the deal
2. The 48% lost the original referendum
You are steadfastly labouring under the false assumption - or wish because it suits you - that people are not allowed to change their minds and that each decision they make is a Lifetime one. 2. The 48% lost the original referendum
Whilst Referendums are indeed rare enough to be Lifetime decisions generally, show us where it is written in Law that they cannot be held on the same Issue within a short period of time.
The absolute fact is, the Government has within its power to call a 2nd Referendum if it chooses to and it can include a Remain option, if it chooses to. You and any other Leaver who hates that fact will have to rely upon it never happening rather that trying to debate why such an occurrence is undemocratic because you are, quite simply, wrong.
What is the difference in principle between a second referendum, and more than two? It's like people are arguing that referendums simultaneously do and don't have any permanence.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff